The Glowing Dream: A history of Socialist America

Prologue: Owe My Soul to the Company Store
  • The Glowing Dream

    Part I

    In the Gloom of Mighty Cities: The Birth of American Socialism


    RedSummer.jpeg


    ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    I dreamed I saw Gene Debs last night, alive as you and me.

    Says I, ‘but Gene, you’re ten years dead’. ‘I never died,’ says he.

    ‘The railway bosses killed you, Gene; they shot you, Gene,’ says I.

    ‘Takes more than guns to kill a man,’ says Gene, ‘I didn’t die’.”


    - ‘Eugene Debs’, by Joe Hill (1907)*

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Conceived in Liberty: The Life and Death of the American Republic, 1776 to 1919 by Richard White (Excerpt)
    (© 1995, Melbourne University Press)​

    George Pullman considered himself a philanthropist. Disturbed by the squalor he saw among the burgeoning industrial classes of the American Republic, the intrepid entrepreneur decided his workers would be a model to the rest, and free from the vice and misery that so afflicted their compatriots.

    To this end, Pullman bought acres of land in the south of Chicago, and established here a utopic ‘workers’ city’, in which the men who built his vaunted, luxury ‘Pullman cars’ might dwell, along with their families. As presented to the world, the little settlement was idyllic. It boasted libraries, schools, neat and pleasant housing, recreational centers, and even churches. Clean and orderly, it seemed a bold answer to the ramshackle slums that sprouted up along the edges of America’s great metropoles like so many mushrooms.

    Indeed, many came to see Pullman’s little experiment from afar and returned with glowing reports of the company town and its contented, industrious residents.

    But to many of the workers who actually dwelt in the place, Pullman city seemed less a patch of heaven on earth than a slave camp, and Pullman himself less a benevolent father than a feudal lord.

    For Pullman may have provided his workers with any number of amenities, but he made sure they paid for them. Pullman was a firm believer in the ideals of thrift and self-sufficiency he believed had made the United States great, and demanded his employees live up to them. There would be no mollycoddling on his watch. Workers were expected to pay their (often quite high) rent on time and in exact amount, with little leeway. Company spies infested the town, carrying rumors of discontent or worse, brewing unionization, back to the boss. Indeed, suspicion that one had affiliated to the AFL, or was friendly with those who had, was enough to lose him his home in the town, and his job with the company. Pullman also imposed curfews on his workers, proscribed alcohol and tobacco within town limits, and staunchly refused any ‘hand-outs’ to the workers, in accord with his philosophy of self-help.

    The men and women of the Pullman company lived their lives under his auspices—as one worker complained; “We are born in a Pullman house, fed from the Pullman shop, taught in the Pullman school, catechized in the Pullman church, and when we die we shall be buried in the Pullman cemetery and go to the Pullman hell.”

    When the great crisis of 1893 hit, and Pullman found his profits tumbling, he wasted little time in slashing wages. Representatives of the workers complained to their boss, who insisted he had had no choice, and that the company was working best as it could to keep on as many workers as possible. He promised there would be no retaliation against those who had organized to present grievances.

    However, only days later, several men who had been party to this bargaining committee were fired—Pullman averred their dismissal had nothing to do with their recent activities, but understandably, the workers did not believe him, and days later went out on strike.

    The action was immediately brought to the attention of the American Railway Union, a new player on the labor stage, fresh from a well-publicized victory over the Great Northern Railway. The union’s president was forty-nine year old Eugene V. Debs, a grocer’s son and long-time labor organizer.

    Strange as it may seem, considering the symbol he was to become, Debs was in fact something of a conservative in the world of labor. Beginning as a member of a railway firemen’s brotherhood, he had been leery about strikes, fearing the violence that often resulted. But by 1894 he was one of the country’s best-known labor leaders, and so it was to him and his union that the Pullman workers appealed.

    It is perhaps one of the great ironies of history that Eugene Debs was in fact one of the less revolutionary of the many luminaries tied up in the storm of ’94. When the ARU pushed for a boycott of Pullman company cars in response to the petition from the Chicago workers, Debs fought the motion and instead sought an arbitrated settlement, fearing (rightly, as it would turn out) that such large-scale action might spiral into disaster.

    Of course, like so many men, Debs soon found that history had gotten away from him, and simply would not wait. Pullman would not negotiate, and the boycott went ahead. So, the strike began, as the first act of the tragedy that would set the course of American history for decades to come.

    America ground to a halt. The strike had a knock-on effect, and soon multiplied far beyond Pullman’s factory town, or even the Chicago trainyards. Soon, railway workers, switchmen, firemen, and all the rest, across 27 states were refusing to move Pullman’s cars in solidarity with their Illinois comrades. Meat and produce rotted in the sun as trains sat idle. The country feared what might transpire should this strike continue once the weather turned, and coal was desperately needed.

    Pullman stubbornly refused any arbitration or concession. But the greater part of national opprobrium, at least as measured by the vicissitudes of the country’s papers, fell on Debs and his colleagues. He was described as ‘King Debs’ or ‘Dictator Debs’, the man who would deprive and even starve America to satiate the ‘communistic demands’ of a few disgruntled Pullman workers. But to the workers themselves, and indeed, to hundreds of thousands of laborers across the land, he was a hero, a champion who had found the courage to stand up to the great titans of industry in the name of the common man.

    The polarization grew ever starker as it became quite clear which side the administration of President Grover Cleveland was on.

    Pullman obtained an injunction from the Supreme Court, declaring that the strikers had no right to interfere with the US mail services, regardless of their grievances. It was a wonderful pretext to undermine the cause of the railwaymen as a whole—the strikers attempted to comply with this injunction, allowing mail cars to pass through where others were barred. But the government and the General Managers Association, lined up behind Pullman, eagerly exploited this opening, mixing up mail cars with all the rest, and making it clear that the trains would run in toto or not at all. And if they did not run at all, then the velvet glove would slip off, and out would come the mailed fist.

    On 3 July, US Marshal J.W Arnold read out the injunction in the Chicago railyards. Surrounded by hundreds of hooting, cat-calling strikers, Arnold kept his cool and informed them that any further interference with the passage of federal mail would be dealt with ‘severely’.

    The response was a shower of bricks and stones from the workers. Arnold was struck in the face and the chest, severely injured, and barely escaped the angry mob with his life. That same day, bandaged and bloodied, he wrote to AG Olney, a long-time friend of the rail lines, and informed him he did not believe that the orders of the court could be enforced by any less than the full force of federal troops.

    And so, the next day (4 July), regular soldiers arrived in Chicago from nearby Fort Sheridan.

    Their presence merely served to further inflame the sentiments of the strikers, who now felt their own government had clearly come out against them (as, indeed, it had).

    The troops camped out on the lakefront, bayonets gleaming menacingly in the summer scene, were regularly hounded by packs of railwaymen, out of work laborers, and young street toughs, who assailed them with jeers and occasionally missiles. It seemed much of the lower quarters of Chicago were now in sympathy with the beleaguered workers, which further unnerved the respectable people of the city, as well as the rail bosses of the GMA and Cleveland himself in his Washington offices. The next several days brought Chicago to a state of near war. Mobs torched train cars, clashed with soldiers, and gathered beneath the windows of those known to sympathize with the ‘bosses’ to chant threats and make demands. By 6 July, thirteen people were dead. The labor movement in Chicago began to speak of a general strike to support the railway workers, now facing down the might of the entire federal government. Such talk spread like wildfire, and soon AFL locals across the country, comprising everyone from timbermen, longshoremen, miners, to stonecutters, pledged their support should the call be put out for such an action.

    But now the ARU, and the leaders of organized labor as a whole, began to lose their nerve. Debs himself feared bloodshed, and in private conversation with his brother wondered if this was indeed worth all the tears and sweat.

    In an emergency conference held in Chicago’s Briggs House hotel, the AFL’s Samuel Gompers came out forcefully against Debs and against a general strike. After some hours of fierce debate, Debs began to lose ground, and the conclave of some twenty labor leaders drafted a resolution that ““a general strike at this time is inexpedient, unwise, and contrary to the best interests of the working people.” It seemed Gompers would get his way, and (reluctantly, admittedly) hand Pullman the victory.

    But then, a frantic telegram burst in on the debating representatives with news—skittish federal troops had, as the delegates debated, again fired on a group of demonstrators near a rail yard just south of the city. This time, it looked as if upwards of twenty were dead. This included, pointedly, several young women and a child of eight years old.

    The emotion generated by this new development (which, as it turned out, would have been exaggerated—only six people had died, and the child had survived) was enough to tip the scales in Debs’ favor, and pull the rug out from under Gompers’ feet.

    A general strike was called.†
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    *I got the idea for 'Joe Hill' (or its ATL equivalent) being written instead in honor of a martyred Debs from some old thread I read once, so credit to whoever came up with it back then.
    †This is the POD. IOTL, the AFL and ARU came very close to calling for a general strike, but ultimately decided against it (though there is also a slight earlier POD in Marshal Arnold being attacked physically by the strikers; in reality he read out the statement and departed unharmed)
     
    Last edited:
    First Blood
  • On 9 July, hundreds of thousands of workers all across America downed their tools. This included not only the 300,000 men of the AFL, but scores more sympathizers not officially affiliated with any union.

    The specter of revolution stalked America.

    Indeed, the New York Times declared, ‘revolution in the air!’, taking leave of its usual sensibility.

    Pullman and the General Managers' Association behind which the rail lords of the north were rallied begged President Cleveland to somehow put down this ‘mad insurrection’. Striking was not technically illegal, of course. But this was something new. Never before had the country seen an organized work-stoppage on this scale. Not even during those heady days of ’77.

    Panic swept the country, particularly among those men and women of means who feared their heads would be the first on pikes should an American redux of the Paris Commune come to be. "Citizens' Self-Defense Associations" sprang up in New York, Philadelphia, Washington, San Francisco, New Orleans, and of course, Chicago itself. These were militias comprised primarily of middle-class young men, who took up arms and patrolled their neighborhoods and beyond, guarding against what many now called ‘a rising red tide’.

    A similar siege mindset soon overtook the workers. Debs himself, watching from his Chicago hotel room window as a mass of workers paraded past, waving fists and American flags and placards denouncing the ‘railway robbers’, was supposed to have sourly quoted Julius Caesar; ‘the die is cast’.

    In San Francisco, a militia smashed up a union office and roughly abused its occupants, nearly killing three. In New Orleans a brief shootout between striking longshoremen and police left four workers and one policeman dead. In New York’s lower east side, German, Jewish, and Italian immigrants gathered to hoist red flags and sing ‘the Internationale’ in their myriad tongues, much to the disgust of many old-stock Americans, shaken by the ‘alien agitators’ in their midst. Tensions simmered for a week, but the volcano would not erupt until 21 July.

    Again, the nexus of the storm would be Chicago.

    Enter John Altgeld, the very peculiar governor of Illinois. A Civil War veteran born to German immigrant farmers, Altgeld was in deep sympathy with the cause of the strikers. Indeed, he had always seen himself and acted as champion of the common man, signing into law restrictions on child labor, struggling to alleviate the deplorable conditions of Chicago's industrial workers, and greatly expanding public education. Only a year before, he had pardoned the men hanged for the Haymarket bombing of 1885, an act that made him simultaneously saint to radicals and devil to conservatives.

    The strike so far had left him in a precarious position. He despised Pullman, but feared to officially mobilize any state resources in the strikers' defense, conscious of the contempt in which he was already held by not only the many conservative citizens of his own state, but by the federal government.

    But on 21 July, the Attorney General issued another injunction on Cleveland’s express (though of course, unofficial) instruction. This one condemned the ARU and the AFL for ‘conspiracy’, and declared that, while, all men were free to quit their jobs, of course, they had no right to keep replacement workers from taking their places. Any further efforts to do so would be met with force for 'interfering with the natural commercial life of the country'.

    Nationally, federal troops were mobilized and called out from their barracks. Soon, the blue coats again marched in the streets of every American metropolis, passing gauntlets of jeers or cheers, depending on the city and the neighborhood.

    This was seen as flagrant provocation by the strikers.

    In Pittsburgh, a steelworker shot a soldier and was consequently beaten to death by the man’s comrades. In Savannah, a biracial band of dockworkers clashed with a ‘self-defense militia’, leaving seven corpses.

    The country descended into a crisis unmatched by any save those terrible months following the election of Abraham Lincoln three decades prior.

    Two days later, on 23 July, a mass of Chicago railwaymen, the fathers of the strike, joined by friends, family, as well as hundreds of fellow Chicago workers from every conceivable trade, joined in Haymarket Square to pay tribute to the ‘martyrs’ of ’85.

    Altgeld watched the gathering with apprehension. He thought, quite correctly, that this was likely to be used as a pretext by the federal government to reduce Chicago, the ‘wellspring of red rebellion’, once and for all. He considered dispersing the demonstrators by force himself, for their own safety, before the US troops could do it for him.

    In the end, and after much painful deliberation, he took a different route, and mobilized state militia to protect the demonstrators. Only hours after these local forces arrived, and after they had fraternized and established friendly relations with the crowd, their federal counterparts marched in from the south of the city and commanded all present to disperse.

    The request was politely turned down. A captain of the militia demanded to know on whose authority these citizens of the United States were being denied their constitutional right to free assembly.

    Chicagoans unsympathetic to the strike, emboldened by the blue-coated soldiers, gathered up behind the lines, and they and their red flag waving opposite numbers began to trade verbal abuse through the bayonets of their respective protectors.

    It is not known, and almost certainly never will be, who fired the first shot, whether an Illinois militiaman, a US soldier, or a private citizen. But it was fired, nonetheless.

    What transpired deserves to be called a ‘battle’. It raged for nearly a half hour. There were no lines to speak of. Weapons were fired at random. When the smoke was cleared, at least sixty corpses littered the square. The federal force, which had numbered five hundred, was outnumbered, shaken by the fury of the crowd and forced to retreat. They were harassed all along their march by hurled projectiles and further gunfire. It was not until they left the thick of the city proper and returned to the shore of the lake that they could regather their wits and take stock of the situation.

    When he was appraised of what had occurred, Cleveland declared not only Chicago, but the entire state of Illinois (by dint of its governor’s evident sympathies), to be in a state of rebellion.

    The people of Chicago, for their part, were both enraged by the slaughter, and fired by their repulsion of an ‘army’. Red flags were run up beneath the stars and stripes on nearly every flagpole in the city.

    Samuel Gompers, who feared for his life thanks to the compromising stand he’d taken, fled the city under cover of darkness, along with a number of the more moderate labor leaders.

    On the morning of 23 July, a ‘workers’ council’ elected by the bodies of Chicago’s various trade unions gathered in the lobby of the Briggs House hotel, where only weeks before, the motion for a strike had nearly been defeated. Debs chaired the meeting, with the blessing of Governor Altgeld.

    The council’s first resolution declared that President Cleveland had ‘flagrantly defiled his noble office, endeavored to strip honest workingmen of their rights and liberties, and compelled American soldiers to fire upon American citizens, in an act of infamy unsurpassed by the worst despots of the far east.’ It was perhaps hyperbolic, but certainly encapsulated the spirit of the moment. The resolution went on to declare that ‘no choice has been left to us but the manful defense of our homes, families, and freedoms, in the great tradition of Washington and Lincoln.’ More crudely, the crowds in the street shouted that the next ‘bluecoat’ to set foot in Chicago would forfeit his life.

    The soldiers camped out on the lake’s shore demanded reinforcements and got them. An extra 3,500 federal troops were soon en route to Chicago, under the command of Colonel Sam Young.

    Cleveland is supposed to have despaired to Vice President Stevenson; “my God, man! This is revolution!”

    All across the country, AFL locals passed resolutions declaring their support for the Chicago 'workers’ council'. Often, their offices were soon after ransacked by unsympathetic mobs, known unionists run out of town or even lynched.

    For Eugene Debs’ part, in appearances before the council, or for the regular speeches he was now obliged to give from the balcony of his hotel, he kept up a stalwart manner and declared his confidence in the workers’ struggle.

    In private, he was despondent, certain the government would soon crush the ‘rising’, and that the labor movement would be drowned in blood, set back decades, if not utterly destroyed forever.

    Indeed, at the moment, Young's 3,500 troops, joined by local volunteers, converged on Chicago by rail line and road, authorized to crush the rebellion by any and all means. The increasingly militant working class of the city threw up barricades in advance, and soon the rail yards and factories were filled with grimy ironworkers and day laborers armed with old sporting pieces, drilling and marching in preparation for a battle they could not win.

    Smaller detachments of federal soldiers were dispatched to other ‘centers of insurrection’ around the country, stretching the 40,000-strong US Army to its limits.

    New Orleans, San Francisco, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, and parts of New York were considered the hotbeds of ‘anarchic subversion’, and it was these that received the greatest complements of soldiers in turn.

    Five companies of US troops arrived on the outskirts of Chicago from the southeast on 27 July, moving to bolster the soldiers driven out of the city in the aftermath of the Haymarket Massacre, which were now crushed against the lake, unable to move thanks to the presence of armed workers’ militias hemming them in on either side.

    The federals easily broke through the lines of the workers and rescued their comrades, and the troops, thus united, wheeled west to push into the heart of the city. It was to prove hard going.

    Once he'd rallied the 2,000 or so stranded troops to his standard, bringing the total men under his command to some 5,500, Young attempted to force his way into heavily working-class east Chicago. This would prove a bloodier task than anticipated. The soldiers, unaccustomed to urban fighting, were disoriented by the cramped, narrow streets and devastated by the withering gunfire pouring down from every ledge and window along the route. Worse, the rebel workers were joined by several platoons' worth of the Illinois state militia. After the massacre in Haymarket Square, Altgeld had released the militiamen from any oaths of service made, and permitted them to lay down their arms and quit the city if they wished. Most did. But a substantial number, sympathetic to the cause of the strikers, remained. They acted as the backbone to the untrained mass of militant workers, and probably were the critical factor in foiling the advance of the federals' that day. Young was repulsed, with dozens more dead.

    This ‘victory’ fired the worker’s council in the Hotel Briggs, which announced that ‘the despot Cleveland’s soldiers are whipped, and the sons of toil victorious’. A giddy motion was passed, which Debs duly, but grimly signed off on, expropriating all property in the city belonging to the Pullman company, and indeed to any firm belonging to the General Manager’s Association. Provisions were made for public schools to be built for all workers’ children and a minimum wage of $7.00 a day was set. How many of the delegates actually believed their council would survive the battle to implement any of these sweeping changes, and how many simply hoped to make a statement that would survive themselves cannot be known. Certainly, Debs remained pessimistic in private, writing out his will and final letters to his wife and children.

    Hysteria reigned in the national press. The papers warned of that the country was awash with ‘alien agitators plucked from the sewers and backstreets of Europe’, and that ‘armies of anarchists’ lurked in every major city, waiting for the signal to strike.

    The scenes in Chicago did bear a grim resemblance to the violence of 1877, and worse, to the dreaded Paris Commune of 1871.

    And it was not just Chicago.
     
    Last edited:
    Massacre
  • "Who fears to speak of '94, who blushes at the name?
    When cowards mock the worker's fate, who hangs his head for shame?
    He's all in name half a slave who slights his people thus
    But true men like you men will fill your glass with us!"

    -Unknown, adaptation of the Irish Republican tune 'Who Fears to Speak of '98?'
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Excerpt from 31 July 1894's edition of the New York Times.



    CHICAGO IN STATE OF WAR; GOVERNMENT TROOPS FAIL TO DISLODGE RED INSURGENTS!

    The hideous violence that has enveloped the nation for now nearly a month fails to abate, instead reaching new and ghoulish heights as the insurgent workmen of the two communes continue their desperate struggle with the government's soldiers. More than five brigades of federal troops are now engaged in Chicago and its outlying districts. Colonel Young, who commands the force, has insisted the city will be pacified within the week, though as of this publication large sections of Chicago, including its central and business districts, remain in the hands of the rebels. Young reports further that the insurgents have proven barbarous in their method of struggle, employing boiling oils after the fashion of the middle ages, as well as arming young women and boys to absorb the brunt of the fire. Debs is chief director of the rebellion—he has issued multiple proclamations from the safety of his quarters in the Briggs Hotel House affirming his intention and the intention of his lieutenants of continuing to the end, though some 500 rebel workmen and their allies are thought fallen so far. In the territory still under its control, the so-called 'Workers' Council' has issued a number of wild edicts, including the expropriation of all workshops and factories employing more than five laborers, the substitution of the red banner for the American national flag, and the abolition of religious education. Its militant defenders are as frenzied as the radicals that lead them and, again, according to Colonel Young, compensate for what they lack in the way of military or firearms training with fanatic ferocity. As a general rule, the presence of the foreign-born in the ranks of the Commune's militiamen greatly outstrips their portion of the population as a whole, Germans and Italians figuring with a special prominence. Though their losses so far vastly outstrip those of the government, there is no present indication that surrender is forthcoming, or indeed that it is even being considered among the stokers of the revolt. Up to a thousand lives are thought to have been lost, with the battle still raging.

    NEW ORLEANS is not in an especially better state, and perhaps worse; though the fighting has ended for a day and indeed lasted only as long, the fires produced are only now being extinguished, and up to 30% of the city is thought to have been lost to the blaze, along with many dozens, if not hundreds of lives. The captains of the revolution in the Crescent City are in the custody of government soldiers, under Colonel Forsyth, who assures they will not be maltreated and will be brought before a proper civilian court in due time. Forsyth insists that no large part of the city was in sympathy with the rebels, that they were and remain generally despised among the residents. This must be weighed against contrary reports that hold very near the whole populace of the old French Quarter at the very least participated in or encouraged the assault upon federal soldiers It seems the revolt here flowered primarily around the dissatisfactions of New Orleans's meaner negro element, as well as a comparable sentiment among the Sicilians that have made their home in the city, and certain 'jacktars' that frequent the wharves. The death toll here has also yet to be counted, though it is thought to be well in excess of three-hundred. Louisiana's Governor Foster has called out the militia to aid the soldiers of the federal government in the reinstatement of order, and in the arduous task of clearing away the rubble and ash left in this tragedy's wake, so that reconstruction might commence.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________​
    From New York to Los Angeles, troops moved to arrest the leadership of AFL locals, and to seize arm caches, if they could be found. In most places, this went off without too much bloodshed.

    But New Orleans was not most places. She had always been the odd one out among the great towns of the south. Her rich history under the grip of the successive French and Spanish colonial empires left an indelible cultural stamp on the crescent city, and part of this cultural legacy was the relative permeability of the color line as compared to the rest of the old Confederacy. That is not to say New Orleans was any sort of racial utopia — the city had and would see it's share of horrific racial violence — but is to say that race relations here were distinctive in character. Nowhere was this more evident than the growing sense of cross-racial solidarity between the black and white laborers of the city’s ports. This meant that, when the longshoremen’s AFL local passed a resolution supporting Chicago in her struggle, attempts by city authorities to drive the dockworkers apart on the basis of race by the use of black scabs, failed, when a great part of them instead joined the strikers. The waterfront was occupied by militant stevedores, many of them armed.

    Governor Foster, though a convinced enemy of organized labor (particularly cross-racially organized labor) would not call out the militia, fearful of the effect bloodshed on a scale anywhere near that seen in Chicago might have on his political fortunes. So, he elected to wait for the arrival of US soldiers. Any violence, should it be necessary, might be laid at their feet, and thirty years after Appomattox and less than twenty after Reconstruction, the federal government was still far from beloved in the south.

    On 30 July, shortly before noon, three companies of federal troops arrived on the South Pacific line from the west to deal with the recalcitrant wharf laborers, under the command of Colonel James Forsyth. Their passage through the city was remembered as an ominous occasion. Much of the population was in sympathy with the strike (though just as much, if not more, was not). When the soldiers marched through the streets on the way to the river, they recalled a "cold silence" from the spectators lining the streets or peering down from old French and Spanish balconies. No jeering or hoots, but no cheering, either.

    About 500 US soldiers invested the wharves on the Mississippi's east bank, ordered the strikers to surrender themselves immediately, and lay down all arms. At first, the longshoremen complied, and allowed the soldiers onto the docks, seemingly willing to surrender their weapons.

    Then a bomb went off, killing twenty soldiers, a dozen workers, and collapsing half the docks into the river. It has never been ascertained precisely who set the device, how many were involved, or how many dockworkers knew of it in advance. It is also unknown whether the seeming surrender was legitimate or rather, as was alleged by some of the soldiers and also by some of the longshoremen, a ruse meant to draw the troops into the blast radius of the primed explosives.

    Nevertheless, the result was chaos, and a gunfight that produced two dozen more corpses. Though Forsyth was shot and injured severely in the tumult, the troops managed to secure the docks. But the sight of ‘Yankee bluecoats’ again firing on southerners enraged many New Orleanians, even those not previously in any sympathy with the strike. Soon, the federals were forced to fall back from the river.

    Trapped in the narrow streets of the French Quarter, the soldiers were assailed by sniper fire from balconies and gunmen crouching in dark alleys. Naturally, they fired back. Somewhere, a spark struck kindling.

    By evening, downtown New Orleans was burning.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Adolph Sutro was a German-born Jew who’d fled his homeland in the wake of the 1848 revolutions. He thus arrived in the United States with a strong attachment to egalitarian, republican ideals. As a private philanthropist, he had invested thousands of dollars in public works and poor relief in his new home of San Francisco, gained a strong following among the city’s working class for his fight against the Southern Pacific Railroad and its monopoly on urban transport in the region, and was duly drafted to run for mayor on the Populist ticket in 1894.

    On the campaign trail when the turmoil broke that summer, he immediately voiced his whole-hearted support for the Chicagoan and New Orleanian workmen now being referred to in the national press as ‘the revolutionaries’. In a speech to the female workers of a waterfront tuna cannery, Sutro declared that ‘the workingmen and women of Chicago are standing for your rights,” and asked, “will you stand for theirs?”

    This speech, and the many others he gave, earned him the ire of then-mayor Ellert, as well as the federal troops which had already been dispatched to San Francisco in view of its’ participation in the general strike.

    On 31 July, as the rebel workers in Chicago battled ferociously for the city, Ellert had Sutro arrested for ‘disturbing the peace’, an order duly carried out by federal soldiers.

    The action sparked immediate outraged among his supporters. The very night of his apprehension, a mob surrounded the jail, and demanded his release. When this was refused, they stormed the building in an attempt to free him by force.

    The panicked federals fired into the crowd. Unlike Chicago and New Orleans, where the mob had some organization and some arms, here they had none, and it was less a battle than a massacre. The precise death toll is unclear, but at least fifty, and perhaps up to a hundred, died that night. Among the dead was Sutro himself.

    The next day, a federal platoon was ambushed near the bay by armed sailors and wiped out nearly to the last man.

    The troops proceeded to seize the waterfront, but, like their compatriots in Chicago, soon found themselves crushed up against the water, advance into the city impeded by numerous and elusive civilian gunmen. Many of San Francisco's more militant residents — and a contingent of 'volunteers' come from Oakland in sympathy with the general strike — amused themselves over the next few days by firing down on the stricken soldiers from rooftops and windows.

    On 2 August, the embattled federals managed to telegraph for help, and on 3 August, the nearby USS Boston appeared off shore. Even as the soldiers continued their erratic, staggered gunfight with the insurgents, the cruiser hit the city with a barrage of shells. The ensuing panic enabled the bluecoats to break out from the docks and in the course of another day's worth of ragged fighting, the city was subdued by 5 August. But it was at the cost of some 500 deaths, and large sections of the city's waterfront reduced to smoking rubble.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Meanwhile, in Chicago, the full complements of soldiers had finally arrived, bringing the total of federal troops up to about 7,000 to take things in hand. On Young's second attempt to storm the city, he marched north along the shore of the lake, and then moved along the Chicago River towards the center of town, hoping to thus bypass the militiamen’s primary defenses (which were oriented towards the southeast).

    They pushed forward, led by a company of cavalry. The workers fought back with stunning tenacity. A young private engaged in the battle later recalled that, ‘them reds sold every inch, but they didn’t sell ‘em cheap.’

    In their place in the Briggs hotel, the delegates of the workers’ council struggled to direct a battle as do men without any training or experience in military matters. Though many of the telegraph lines in the city were out of commission, the front was so near communication by couriers on foot or horseback was possible. The rebel workers had by this point been organized into crude 'divisions' (of a few dozen men) under the commands of provisionally elected 'captains' (generally drawn from those state militiamen that had remained). When some breathless messenger burst into the Briggs House with word from Captain So-and-So, gasping that the soldiers had broken through this or that barricade, the floundering answer carried back to the fighters from the hapless council was always the same: 'resist!'

    And they did.

    The fighting in Lake Park was particularly fierce, with the soldiers finding themselves crushed against the shore and nearly ‘driven into the water’, as a sergeant recalled. The waves ran red with blood before the rebel workers were flung back.

    Desperate to reduce the ‘commune’ as quickly as possible, Young, with the personal permission of Cleveland, authorized the use of artillery, which he had hitherto forbidden. On 3 August a vicious bombardment was unleashed on east and central Chicago. In a grim echo of the civil war and a prefiguration of the European Wars, city blocks were pounded to rubble by heavy guns, and scores of civilians killed in the act.

    Meanwhile, the delegates continued their feverish work, even as smoke deluged the building and the windows shattered under the pressure of cannon fire. Most now fully expected they would die. This included Debs.

    Whereas early in the drama the council had passed resolution after resolution detailing the new city they intended build, now they took to drafting lengthy paeans to the 'resistance' put up by proletarians of Chicago that they hoped might remain immortal when they themselves were dead.

    The day before federal troops finally broke through the lines and stormed the hotel itself, Debs stood at the head of the council and informed them that he believed they had ‘fought hard and fought for the right’, and that they were the victors ‘in the eyes of God and of mankind’.

    That evening, under artillery fire, Governor Altgeld himself put in a final appearance at the hotel, commending the delegates in much the same way. Debs attempted to convince him to flee, but Altgeld was adamant he would not give ‘the enemy’ the satisfaction of tarring him as a coward.

    Shortly after dawn the following morning, 4 August, nearly a month after Cleveland had first called out the Army, the last of the rebel workers’ 'divisions' collapsed. Federal troops flooded into the city center and surrounded the hotel. The workers’ council was swiftly arrested, amazingly without any deaths (save for a delegate from the Chicago bricklayers, a German named Kruger, who fired on the soldiers with two revolvers and was summarily cut down).

    New Orleans was fully pacified two days later. Summary executions went on for days in ‘the three insurrectionary communes' (though only in Chicago had anything that could remotely be called a 'commune' been formed), and in a number of other locales where the fighting had been lighter but still bloody.

    The fighting had lasted two weeks. Much of New Orleans, and large sections of Chicago, were in ashes. At least 2,000 lives were lost. Likely, the death toll was much higher.

    The country was traumatized. And one man was to blame.

    Whether that man was Eugene Debs or Grover Cleveland was another matter.
     
    Last edited:
    The Execution of Eugene Debs and the Agonies of the Democratic Party
  • Eugene Debs was arrested on 4 August 1894 at the House Briggs by federal soldiers, along with the rest of the Chicago Workers’ council.

    Carried out of the city, where sporadic fighting still raged, he was imprisoned at Fort Sheridan, along with his comrades.

    It was now the government had to decide what to do with him.

    The answer was quite clear to most of respectable society. The San Francisco Examiner tartly opined that “we shall either have to…hang Debs or make him king.” Harper’s Weekly imagined “a new pantheon of American traitors, with Davis and Debs at the left and right hands of Arnold.”

    In fact, the conviction that Debs ought to swing from the highest tree in the land seemed one of the very few shared by nearly all voices in the political mainstream, Democratic and Republican alike. Certainly, the captains of industry who felt personally threatened by the chaos of what was already coming to be called ‘Red ‘94’, were unanimous in their condemnation of the ‘anarchist Debs’. John Morgan warned that ‘such radicals…threaten to undo the best government on earth.’

    It is difficult to overstate the feeling of terror that gripped so many in the wake of those weeks. No educated American was unfamiliar with the horrors of the French Terror, or of the Paris Commune that succeeded it. In the bloodshed and flames of Chicago, San Francisco, or New Orleans, they saw the harbinger of that selfsame anarchy here in their own country. The dissolution of constitutional government and a plunge into mob rule seemed disturbingly plausible.

    But Debs had his supporters, too, and they were just as fierce as his foes.

    The Appeal to Reason, a newly formed socialist periodical, making sardonic light of the country’s ongoing obsession with sectional ‘reconciliation’ in the wake of the still-recent civil war, demanded that Debs ‘receive the treatment due to vicious traitors such as the architects of the late southern rebellion—that is, that he be set at liberty immediately, taken for a bold and noble hero, and embraced as a brother.” Speaking more seriously, it went on to denounce Cleveland, Pullman, and the soldiers who had put down the workers as ‘the only men who ought to be on trial for their lives—for they are traitors not only to their countrymen, but to all the decent sentiments of humanity itself.’

    The People’s Voice, mouthpiece of the left-leaning Populist Party took a more guarded line, but asked ‘can Debs in fact shoulder all the blame for the horror? Is the government guiltless? Was it Eugene Debs who turned the great guns of the United States Army on Chicago and New Orleans?’.

    For many Americans, those who labored twelve hours daily in the grim mills or soot-drenched factory yards of the great cities, the bloodshed of that summer was a harbinger, not of looming anarchy and devastation, but of a renewed liberty and a world that might be.

    Like their more conservative counterparts, these hopeful individuals considered the Paris Commune or the European Spring of Nations as they pertained to the recent carnage; but considered them with a sense of hope and admiration.

    It was soon said that a cheaply printed sheet bearing the music and lyrics of the ‘Internationale’ could be picked up from any gutter in Chicago.

    Even as letters poured in to the Executive Mansion demanding Debs and his fellow conspirators be punished ‘to the fullest extent of the law’, the man’s supporters set up ‘Debs clubs’ across the country to proclaim his innocence, and to more generally discuss the obstacles facing American labor, and the vague, but shining dream of socialism.

    More than one physical altercation resulted as a result of this terrible division—in Mobile Alabama, a group of drunken young men returning from a ‘Debs club’ meeting assaulted a local shopkeeper known to be unfriendly to organized labor, dragging him from his bed and nearly beating him to death in front of his screaming wife. In Denver, a self-appointed ‘Citizens’ Defense Militia’ panicked and fired into a crowd of miners rallying in support of Debs, severely injuring five men.

    Cleveland himself despaired that ‘it seemed half the country was in sympathy with the insurgents’. In fact, his popularity had taken a severe hit in all corners. Even among those who believed that his decision to call in federal forces had been the right one, he was widely denounced for the evident incompetence that had created such a situation in which it was necessary to employ the US Army thus. In the weeks between July and November, Cleveland and the Democratic Party hemorrhaged support. They found few friends, certainly not among those sympathetic to the strikers, and not even many among those unsympathetic. By November 1894, Eugene Debs was almost certainly more popular among Americans than President Cleveland.

    As for Debs himself, he languished in Fort Sheridan, awaiting the verdict on his fate. The man fully expected he would be put to death, and so began putting his own affairs in order. He outlined his own version of events, stating emphatically that ‘neither I, nor anyone else, wanted the strike, much less what followed. We were left without choice.’ He denied any role in organizing the Chicago ‘commune’ (as it was coming to be called), insisting that the delegates to the council had been chosen and elected by local factory and workshop committees (as was indeed the case), and that his position as chairman had been almost entirely ceremonial (not quite true). He stated emphatically in a letter to his wife, ‘I am no insurrectionist’. However, he qualified, ‘there is such a thing…as a just insurrection.’

    He recommended George Howard, also under arrest, to lead the ARU after his death, though he knew full well the union was in shambles and unlikely to ever recover. He excoriated Samuel Gompers for his ‘treason’ in refusing to support the general strike or even to speak out in favor of the workers ‘butchered’ by federal troops.

    Interestingly, even as Debs became the center of a national storm of opprobrium and acclamation, the other significant figure of the rising went strangely unnoticed. That was the man who was still technically governor of Ilinois, John Altgeld. He had been arrested soon after the workers’ council, and now sat in Fort Sheridan alongside Debs.

    Perhaps it was that he was foreign-born, and therefore ‘expected’ to side with radicals. Or perhaps it was his pre-existing reputation as a friend of labor, as opposed to Debs who seemed to have exploded from nowhere and caught the eyes of the nation.

    Regardless, Altgeld simply did not capture the public imagination the way Debs did.

    Eventually, after months of national deliberation, it was decided to bring both men, as well as their less recognizable co-conspirators, up on charges of sedition, insurrection, and treason against the United States of America.

    Altgeld was tried first, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, presided over by Federal Judge Grosscup, the same man who’d enforced the government’s injunction against the strikers months earlier. The trial began on 8 February 1895.

    It was a stormy affair, though nowhere near the circus Debs’ trial would become. The prosecution averred his treason lay in summoning state militia to do battle with US troops. He insisted he had acted entirely in his capacity as governor in calling out the militia to protect the ‘demonstrators’ in Haymarket Square, and had no intention they should ever open fire on anyone, much less on federal soldiers.

    When asked who the militia might have been protecting the assembled crowd from, if not the troops, he answered, ‘disorder’.

    The prosecution fired back that, even if he had only called out the militia to maintain order in the square, since as far as the government was concerned, the ‘demonstrators’ were by this point already insurrectionists and rebels, he was still guilty of treason in giving them aid.

    The trial lasted two weeks, and the jury deliberated for two hours before returning a verdict of guilty on all counts.

    Upon being sentenced to hang, Altgeld stood and bowed.

    Debs’ trial commenced a month later, on 10 March.

    1,000 troops were called out to defend the courthouse as he was brought back into Chicago, where the walls were still pockmarked with bullets. Several men were detained on various occasions attempting to enter the building with firearms. Some evidently intended to assassinate the defendant; others to free him.

    Debs was struck with the same charges as Altgeld: sedition, insurrection, and treason. The Socialist Labor Party, which Debs had joined while imprisoned, and which had eagerly accepted him, helped furnish as counsel country lawyer Clarence Darrow. Darrow had in fact been an attorney for the Northwestern Railway, and for this reason Debs initially mistrusted him. But Darrow soon proved his sincerity, taking the case at severely reduced rates, claiming to have been disgusted by the government and the railroad’s dealings with the strikers.

    Finding a jury proved exceedingly difficult, as there was not a man in the country without a strong opinion on Eugene Debs one way or the other. When one was finally selected, it had to be replaced once it was discovered three of the men had received bribes from ‘mysterious interests’ to decide against Debs.

    The prosecution charged that Debs had come to Chicago with the express intent of fomenting rebellion and establishing ‘a commune’ in the city. To answer this, Darrow presented evidence of his client’s past conservatism, his previous distaste for striking, and the inability of any investigator to find that ‘he had ever spoken a revolutionary word’. He also shot down many of the more hysterical rumors that had swirled in the aftermath of what was already being called 'Red Summer'. He pointed out that it was not true the Workers' Council had replaced the Stars and Stripes with the red flag, nor that it had ordered a general expropriation of private property.

    Debs sometimes did not help his own case when he made it clear that, though he had certainly once been a rather cautious partisan of labor, the savagery of the previous summer had radicalized him further than he had ever imagined possible.

    When the prosecution again insisted he was a revolutionist, Debs said once more that he ‘deplored bloodshed’ but imagined ‘it is inevitable one day there will be a great commonwealth of toil over this land, or else the despotism on display in Chicago and New Orleans will become general. There is no other option.’

    The comment hardly reassured his detractors and irked Darrow. Later, the lawyer claimed that, though he did not believe Debs wanted to die, at times it seemed as if he did not care if he did. Eventually, during his final presidential run, Darrow would opine that Debs had suffered from an extreme guilt, feeling himself responsible for what the strike had become.

    Samuel Gompers (who had himself been briefly arrested in the aftermath of the rising, though he was quickly released when it was made clear he was no revolutionist), though Debs had already disavowed him as a traitor, testified for the defense, affirming that, though Debs had favored the general strike, it had only been with extreme reluctance, and that he had certainly displayed no inclination towards or desire for violence.

    At a certain point, a spectator called Gompers a ‘filthy Yid’, upon which the old trade unionist leapt from the dock and struck the man in the face.

    When asked why he had remained in Chicago after the rising had broken, if he was not its director, or at least one of them, Debs answered that he felt duty bound to stick by the workers until the end. This was certainly not what his counsel wanted to hear, with Darrow hoping to argue that he had simply feared to attempt any flight in the midst of such savage fighting.

    On 25 March, two weeks into the trial, the proceedings were interrupted when a group of four railwaymen, armed with knives and two pistols, managed to gain entry into the courthouse, hoping to liberate Debs. They were seized quickly, but not before managing to squeeze off a few shots. No one was injured, and Darrow joked wryly that the men had ‘sought—rather poorly—to make my case for me.’

    In the end, Darrow failed to make his case that Debs had been largely carried along by events beyond his control and was not the revolutionary mastermind depicted in the papers. He had chaired the workers’ council after all, and he stubbornly refused to disavow the rising.

    The jury went into recess on 30 March and deliberated for ten hours. By a single vote, it returned a verdict of guilty on all counts.

    Eugene V. Debs was sentenced to death—Darrow’s one great victory was swaying the court to allow his client to escape the noose in favor of his preferred method of the firing squad.

    When the heterogenous crowd outside was made aware of the sentence, it imploded as those who cheered attacked those who hooted and vice versa. The soldiers dispersed the crowd by force with two deaths.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    1894’s congressional elections hit the Democrats hard. The waffle, unsatisfying nature of Cleveland’s administration certainly played some role in this—he had alienated western silverites with his repeal of the Silver Act and angered many industrialists and urban workers with his repeal of long-existing tariffs, but it is unlikely the walloping the Democratic Party received that year would have been nearly so crushing were it not for the bloody events of that summer.

    At the polls, the Democrats found themselves roundly rejected in just about every region.

    Certainly, the Republicans benefited from the collapse of their old nemeses. In the House, the Democrats lost an astonishing 182 seats, leaving them with a devastating 62 congressmen. The Republicans received a handsome spoil of 83 new seats, bringing their total to 210. This was not bad for a party that only eight years before had seemed on the brink of death.

    But the real winners were the Populists, the silver-minded, western-oriented farmer’s party that proudly proclaimed itself the sworn enemy of eastern business interests and elite corruption in both of the great parties.

    In the weeks following the risings, Populist candidates had taken a decisively condemnatory stance on Cleveland’s administration. While few went so far as to say that the rebel workers had been in the right, or that Debs ought to be set free, it was consensus in the party that the brutal suppression of the ‘communes’ had been unforgivable cruelty on part of the government.

    The Populists more than quadrupled their portion of the vote in 1890 and ‘92 and swept into the house with 50 seats. This was attributed then, probably accurately, almost entirely to the effects of the risings. Whatever support Cleveland might have picked up from Republicans or other conservative elements who admired a policy that was ‘tough on radicals’ was more than wiped out by the massive defection from their working class and immigrant constituencies.

    As a Populist mayoral candidate in Colorado put it, “the Democrats have hung the workingman out to dry…so now the workingman will hang the Democrats out to dry.”

    They swept the Midwest, taking majorities in Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, and made significant gains in other states such as California and Minnesota.

    They had even cracked the Democratic south, picking up a majority of the 5 seats in Alabama, 3 in Louisiana, 5 more in Georgia, and taking every seat in North Carolina, save one, which went to Richmond Pearson, a Republican.

    They also picked up three new senators in Alabama, North Carolina, and Kansas, respectively, bringing their total to 8.

    It was certainly cause for celebration, and celebrated it was in Populist strongholds across the country.

    Another party gained as well, and one that loomed far more ominously in the minds of many than the populists; in 1894, the Socialist Labor Party entered congress for the first time, with an impressive showing of 7 seats in the House, including Daniel de Leon at the beginning of his stormy congressional career. Partisans supposed their returns may have been even higher had not New Orleans, Chicago, and San Francisco, still under martial law in November of 1894, been barred from voting.

    Unlike the populists, the Socialists did not shy away from apology for the ‘risings’. Their speeches and sloganeering were replete with demands that justice be done for the ‘martyrs of Chicago and New Orleans’, and denunciations of ‘gory Grover’, the ‘hireling of the great lords of mine, rail, and steel’. The SLP proudly advertised itself as ‘the party of Debs’, who had officially joined from his cell in Fort Sheridan. It demanded his release and acquittal, along with the releases and acquittals of all those arrested for some part in the summer’s chaos, which numbered nearly 6,000 across the nation. It was the appeal of this uncompromising sentiment among many workers and angry dissidents, more than any reasoned attachment to socialist ideals, that seems to have been behind their astounding gains that fall. The fact that they were the only party affirming, without qualification, that the rebels of the Red Summer had been in the right, gave them a significant leg up over any opposition in certain quarters.

    In many places, especially the south, the populists and socialists (and occasionally even the Republicans) ran on joint-tickets—though they were not necessarily in perfect accord. The growing base of the SLP was industrial laborers in the cities of the north and miners in the west, many of these men recent immigrants who often spoke little English. That of the populists was farmers in the south and Midwest, most of them old-stock Americans with a deep-rooted attachment to the land and soil. But for the moment, they stuck by each other and tempered any simmering criticisms, more than aware there remained two goliaths to be struck down.

    The shift in the Senate was less dramatic, but still eye-catching; the Republicans picked up 4 seats, all formerly Democrat.

    The short of it was that the elections of 1894 had all but destroyed the Democratic Party, mollified the long-suffering Republicans, and catapulted two former nonentities to a prominence many found portentous, and unnervingly so.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    8 April, 1895

    Chicago, Illinois

    It was a cold morning, and Eugene Debs demanded a thicker jacket. It was on the same grounds on which King Charles asked for a coat, centuries before—so that the trembling induced by the stiff winter breeze would not be taken for fear.

    The request was granted, Debs, slipped into the heavy woolen article, and trudged out of the prison house into the gravelly courtyard. Two bluecoated soldiers flanked him on either side. Their bayonets glinted in the early sunlight. The condemned towered over them both.

    An attendant officer stepped forward, holding a length of black crepe. Debs compliantly turned and allowed the cloth to be pulled tight around his eyes and fastened at the base of his skull. Held gently by the bindings around his wrists, he was led to the far wall. The very same officer affixed the crisp little patch of white paper to Debs’ lapel, just over his heart.

    If that heart began to beat faster, none noticed, and the man himself certainly did not acknowledge it. The soldiers took up positions, performing last minute inspections of their weapons, setting their booted feet at proper angles for a solid, unwavering shot.

    The little gang of reporters gathered in the corner watched, enraptured. The crowd was small. Only a small coterie of prison officials, and a number of federal representatives had shown to watch the proceedings. The public was not permitted entry, as it had been to the hanging of ex-governor Altgeld two weeks prior.

    Debs reached the far wall and was briskly turned. He was offered a cigarette and declined it. He had been offered the services of a priest or a reverend that morning and declined them. The officer offered them once more.

    “I’ll thank you not to ask me, again,” Debs said, curtly.

    The officer said nothing and backed off.

    “Anything more to say, sir?” he asked.

    The reporters crowded in, though Debs could not see them, now. The wind bit at the exposed skin of his face and neck. He shivered, though thankfully not to the point it was noticeable through the thick coat.

    Debs swallowed, nodded, and then raised his head and spoke. With his vision obscured, it was if he was already staring—and speaking—into the void.

    He spoke with enough measurement that it was clear he had prepared in mind at least the essence of the final address beforehand in his cell, but there was enough tremor in the voice it was just as clear that to continue in the face of the guns took considerable fortitude.

    “John Brown went to Harpers Ferry knowing he might very well lose his life in the action. I can’t claim the same kind of conviction—I didn’t go to Chicago meaning to die for it. But like John Brown, I’ve come to see that 'the crimes of this guilty land can never be purged away but with blood'.” He paused briefly. “Go on and fire.”

    “Ready! Aim!”

    The crack of the rifles split the cool morning air.
     
    Last edited:
    The Election of 1896

  • San Francisco

    October, 1895
    “You sure about this, Jack?”

    “Yes, I’m goddamned sure. Quit asking. You wanna turn yellow, that’s fine with me. But I won’t.”

    Jack clutched the little rifle tighter to his chest. It was an old, rusting wartime Winchester that had certainly seen better days. But it still functioned, and as far as the fired-up lad was concerned, that would be enough. Zeal would do the rest. And zeal he had in spades.

    He crept up the groaning stairs, Jimmy following close behind. Jimmy Slade liked to say he didn’t exist—he’d been born in the foulest Oakland slum but there was no birth certificate to affirm that was true. This was in part why Jack had brought him along. While he didn’t say as much to his more skittish comrade, he expected their deaths as the likely outcome of this endeavor. It would be worth it, of course, but if some men had to die, who better than the man who didn’t exist and the man who didn’t much care one way or the other if he did?

    They reached the third floor, with a fine view of the rolling cobblestone street below, and beyond that the sparkling bay, revealed beneath a sheet of fog curling back on the Pacific.

    Jimmy drew his pistol. Perhaps it wasn’t fair that Jack got a rifle and Jimmy only a pistol, but they’d sorted that out the fairest way young men could—drawing straws. And Jack got the rifle.

    “Alright, now,” Jack went on. He went over to the window. The building had been abandoned since the risings, when some dockworkers had holed up here and had it out with the federal troops for a good five hours before the boys in blue finally broke in and killed damn near everyone inside. Jack had watched it all crouched in an alley across the way. It still made the bile rise in his throat. That was part of the reason he’d picked this derelict old tenement, beside the excellent vantage point it provided.

    Here the workers had drowned in their own blood, and now it was from here the workers would be avenged.

    “Now,” Jack started over, realizing he’d drifted off in a reverie. “Keep watching me across the street. I’m gonna wave the rifle when I see him coming. Then you get ready. I’m gonna shoot first. You don’t need to shoot unless I don’t get him. If I don’t get him—”

    “How am I gonna know if you got him?” Jimmy asked.

    “Because if I get him, I’m damn sure the cab will stop.”

    Jimmy licked his lips.

    “Right.” His eyes darted about nervously. “Then what? Then we take off running, meet at the wharf?”

    Jack was silent for a second. “Right. Yeah. Just that.” He clapped his friend on the shoulder. “Good luck.” Then he stuffed his rifle under his heavy coat and jogged back downstairs, leaving his friend at his post. He got back out onto the street and rapidly crossed it, keeping his head down, brim of his hat pulled down over his eyes.

    His own post was across the road and a little further north, so that from his window he’d have a view around the corner and would be able to see their target coming before Jimmy did. This too was a building left abandoned in the wake of the risings. This one had been an old cannery and was half-burned out during the fighting.

    Walking awkwardly to disguise the rifle stuffed beneath his coat, Jack hurried through the early morning crowds of rough-edged laborers on their way to work and gentlemen and ladies in their broad hats and fine dresses. The later made him want to spit. He refrained.

    He got around the old cannery, slipped in through a long-ago shattered window, and ascended the stairs to the second story. From here he could see south and to the old tenement where he’d left his friend. Jack squinted and caught sight of Jimmy in the window, so far away. He waved. No response. He waved again. This time Jimmy saw and waved back. Good.

    Jack checked his rifle once more. It was loaded. It was ready. Now they just had to wait.

    He could hardly believe it’d been a year and a half already since the risings.

    Jack had never liked bosses. Never liked fat men in pretty clothes who held more gold than most folks would ever see in their lives, without having worked for any of it. He’d never liked the forces of order, uniforms or guns. He was a street rat by nature, made his living in odd jobs and the occasional snatched coin. The world as it was didn’t agree with him, so he didn’t agree with it.

    That summer of ’94 he’d just gotten back into town from a stretch on a steamer out east (or west, as it was). It was a few months after his eighteenth birthday, and he’d not had a lot to do. He’d spent some time with a girl down near the wharf and was just about parting ways with her when he picked up a discarded paper and learned about what was happening out on the Great Lakes.

    All he had to know was that workingmen were on strike to know he was on their side.

    But when the storm came to San Francisco—

    Jack had been at the jail that night, when Sutro was shot and the soldiers fired into the crowd. He’d seen men and women, almost none armed with so much as a club or a stone, scythed down by stone-faced, bluecoated riflemen that reminded him of factory machines. That’s what he saw, wind-up clockwork soldiers slaughtering flesh and blood. He watched that blood ooze on the stones and heard lead split bone.

    By the time the bleeding was done he was convinced it all had to go. The bosses, the army, the presidents, the cartels. All of it.

    He was hardly the only one in the Oakland slums with similar ideas. Everyone knew someone who’d been gunned down or burned to death during the course of the risings. A German seaman taught him a lick of Marx, and Jack suddenly saw the future opened up before him. He spread the gospel far as he could, and Jimmy was one of the converts he’d made in the back alleys and wharves.

    But they had to do something, and Jack had agonized for nearly over a year over what was to be done.

    It was now that they’d shot Debs that he’d finally gotten the kick in the ass he needed. Debs’ death had to be repaid. The workers couldn’t take it lying down, not anymore. The bosses might think they were sitting pretty after all the blood they’d spilled in Red ’94, but they were goddamned wrong, and Jack intended to show them just that.

    When Huntington made his way back to San Francisco to personally oversee the construction of some new tram line, after the old was seriously damaged in the riots, Jack knew what he must do.

    Huntington was bastard of bastards. The sort of man who bought politicians and was proud to have done it. The sort of man who—knowing the wages of San Francisco's workers were dependent on the tram cars and rail lines he owned—jacked prices high as he could raise them without starving to death the very wretches whose scanty earnings he coveted. After the smashing of the risings, he’d gladly donated hundreds of thousands to the city in the interest of ‘rebuilding’—everyone knew the money went instead to the surly ‘deputies’ that now prowled San Francisco hunting for whiffs of unionization and answering vagabonds and jobless men with clubs, determined to prevent so much as the shadow of another Red Summer.

    He had to die.

    Jack had traced Huntington’s routes for two weeks now. He almost always took this one in the mornings, headed to the dock to oversee construction of the terminal point of the new tram line. Or where the terminal point would be, anyways.

    He traveled in a personal little cab. No security, thankfully. They nearly always took this turn.

    So, Jack’s plan was to fire over the head of the driver when they came into view. With luck, the man would stop. He would leap out of his seat and drop his reins. Huntington would spill out after him. Jack would draw a bead on the old man and splash his brains over the street. If he failed to stop the cab, it would come down to Jimmy.

    Jack doubted his friend’s ability to kill a man from the distance they were at with a pistol. But it was only a backup plan, and God willing they would not need it.

    Jack settled in against the window, rifle tight against his chest, and waited.

    The crowds continued to float by below. Jack watched them with a sort of sorrow. He wished he could just wake them up. Rouse them. What could be accomplished if the masses of people only knew what kind of power was in their hands? Injustice, poverty, despotism—it could all be swept away in a fortnight if only the slumbering titan would awaken.

    Well—perhaps this would serve as an alarm.

    He watched intently and then—finally. Around the corner, just up the way, he saw the black cab trundling towards him, the horse pulling along steadily, hooves clicking on stone. Jack turned and frantically waved the barrel of his rifle at Jimmy across the road. Jimmy waved back, indicating he’d gotten the message.

    Jack nodded and repositioned himself in the window. Aiming at an angle, not wanting to lean out over the sidewalk and get himself seen, he tried to level the Winchester’s sights with the cab. He didn’t need a direct shot.

    The cab turned the corner, Jack tracking its movement all the way. He jerked the weapon up, only an inch or so it seemed above the coachman’s head.

    He fired. The Winchester popped. There was a ripple in the crowd. A few people stopped and turned. Some looked in his general direction. But the old rifle was smooth enough no one yet seemed to realize what was happening. He worked the lever and fired again.

    Now they knew.

    The cab ground to a halt. As he’d expected, the coachman leapt down from his seat. The crowd scattered, screaming. Jack fired one more time, desperate to sow as much chaos as possible. In the welter, shooting down Huntington should not be so difficult.

    The coachman leaned into the cab and spoke to the passenger. Yes. Good.

    The cab door swung open. A figure wrapped in an old black suit and the tall hat of a consummate bourgeois hobbled out. Even from his vantage point, Jack could make out the man’s elderly, weakening gate. He smiled.

    We’ve got you, now.

    He leveled the rifle at Huntington’s back, as he moved around the side of the cab. Fired.

    The shot went wide.

    “Shit!” he hissed.

    Huntington picked up the pace. Jack’s next shot missed, too. He saw it whiz into the flagstones on the street, produce a quick flash of sparks, and then sail off uselessly into the bright morning.

    “Goddammit!”

    And then Huntington had gotten around to the other side of the cab, and Jack no longer had a line of sight. He swore.

    Suddenly there was another pop. He whirled around. The hiss of a pistol. Jimmy was shooting.

    He wanted to roar, “not yet!” and cuff his friend, but of course could hardly do that from across the road.

    Jack reloaded the rifle and sprinted back down to the street. He burst out of the abandoned cannery, scanning for the stopped cab. He found it, and pushed through the stampeding crowd, not bothering this time to conceal his weapon. No one troubled him for it. He rushed for the cab, dodging horses and men and food carts.

    He reached it, triumphant, expecting to find Huntington cowering there beside his coachman, where he could be finished off with ease.

    He found nothing. They’d fled.

    Jack turned in a slow circle. He scanned the street. He scanned the floor-level windows of buildings. Nothing. His target was gone. He’d missed. He’d failed.

    Fuck!”

    He turned to run. He ran back towards the tenements, hoping to collect Jimmy and then flee. If they could make good their escape, they might better prepare for the next time. He ran, head into the wind, along with the rest of the crowd that he’d stampeded with his own rifle shots. The firearm bobbed in his right hand, barrel down towards the ground.

    Then he heard it: “hey! Hey! He’s got a gun! He’s got a—he’s the one shooting!”

    “Shit!”

    He picked up the pace, put more power into his legs. But it was no good. Suddenly a mob of men had formed up behind him and was chasing him. He cleared the block. Leapt from the curb. He looked up. He could see the window where he’d left Jimmy.

    Then someone knocked into him. Jack went sprawling to the ground. He kicked and punched and swore. He felt the weight of another body atop him. The rifle was pried from his fingers. He twisted his head around. Someone socked him in the jaw.

    “Who you tryin’ to kill, boy?” demanded one of the vigilantes who’d brought him down, a large man in a waistcoat.

    “Go to hell,” he spit, over a bloodied lip.

    They held him there, face to the curb, until shortly the police at last arrived on the scene to collect him. He did not resist as they crammed him into the back of a black Maria, snapped the horse’s reins, and trundled him off to jail.

    After some time in his cell, Jack realized he’d heard nothing of Jimmy, and figured he’d made good his escape.

    Well, good for him. Once he got out of here, Jack figured he’d find him easily enough, they’d coordinate, and the next time it would work. After all, since he hadn’t killed Huntington, they couldn’t rightly hang him for murder. He would get out; it was only a matter of some time.

    But then—with the way the country was going now, maybe they would just shoot him, leave him in a ditch somewhere, all off the books. He knew it was happening, now. He’d read in the Populist papers of union men shot down in coal country and in the south.

    When the police demanded his story, he gave it freely.

    “I meant to kill Collis P. Huntington because he’s a greedy bastard, a capitalist dog, and an enemy of the working class of the whole country. I meant to kill him to avenge the death of Eugene Debs, who was a hero to the workers. That’s it, and I’m hardly ashamed, except that it didn’t work out.”

    “You know that’s a hanging offense, son,” said one of the officers.

    “I suppose it is,” Jack shrugged.

    “Who helped you?”

    “Just me all alone. I didn’t need help, and I didn’t want any.”

    “What’s your name, boy?” they demanded next. “I know you got one.”

    Well, he did. He was no Jimmy Slade; there would be a record of his birth somewhere, and he imagined the police would find it eventually if they insisted on digging enough. But there was no reason he had to make it easy on them.

    So, he said: “Jack London.”
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    1896 was without a doubt the most tumultuous election year since 1860. Indeed, many a contemporary noted a number of disturbing parallels between the state of affairs, then and now.

    Just like in 1860, the election of 1896 would unfold in the shadow of incredible domestic violence—Bleeding Kansas and John Brown’s raid then, Red ’94, now. Just like in 1860, the customary two candidates would give way to a confusing welter of would-be presidents.

    1895 had existed as a mere coda to that horrible summer, and so too, it seemed, would 1896. The violence had died down, but not been extinguished. In the fall of '95, a bipartisan motion had passed congress outlawing the AFL as an ‘insurrectionary organization’ for its part in the violence.

    The October of 1895, half a year after Debs’ execution, a ragged twenty-year-old San Franciscan named John Chaney attempted and failed to assassinate aging railroad tycoon Collis Huntington. He cited ‘the cause of the wretched poor’ and a desire to avenge Debs as motivation.

    This incident did little to assuage the fears of those who saw red assassins in every shadow and were convinced ’94 was merely the prelude to some future revolutionary convulsion that would engulf the nation entire. The New York Journal worried that, ‘the embers of rebellion are still smoking’, and its editors were far from alone in that fear.

    The Republicans nominated dark-horse candidate William McKinley, the well-liked governor of Ohio, against the wishes of the party elite. He would campaign on ‘sound money’ and tariffs for the protection of industry and labor, with the assurance that the Democratic Party’s pitiful and ever-declining state all but secured him the presidency.

    The Democratic Party of President Cleveland, for its part, was thoroughly upset in the aftermath of the risings and the disastrous elections the following fall. The confidence of the party bosses was deeply shaken. Cleveland was uninspiring, dithering, and now, after Red ’94, considered an execrable murderer by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Americans. Not a Democrat seemed to believe he would win reelection. It was always rare, through the whole history of the American republic, that the party of a sitting president repudiated him. But the Democratic Party found itself in a uniquely miserable state that year.

    Some in the party pinned their hopes on William Jennings Bryan. ‘The Boy Orator of Platte’ was, like Lincoln, a young, vigorous Illinois lawyer with an electrifying effect upon crowds and a staunch attachment to free silver and the common son of toil. He maintained many friends in the ranks of the Populists, and it was hoped that if he was nominated, the Democrats might manage to claw back at least a few of the voters they’d lost in ’94.

    Indeed, to many he seemed the Party’s only hope.

    But Bryan would have no more to do with the Democrats. Besides fearing for his own political future should he hitch his star to the decaying corpse of Cleveland’s party, he was personally disgusted by the slaughter of the Red Summer.

    Bryan resigned his membership in the Democratic Party, and, uncontested, easily took the Populist nomination, with the dynamic Georgian senator Thomas Watson as his running mate.

    He was not the only one. Many free silver Democrats were friendly to the Populists, whose supporters were desperately needed if the party was to play to the increasingly anti-gold sentiments of much of its base, either left the party in the wake of the risings or at least refused to be considered as a presidential candidate, including the favored Richard P. Bland.

    The nomination had become a poisoned chalice.

    Despondent, the Democrats held their noses and re-nominated Cleveland, who seemed little more enthused than anyone else, and just as listlessly drew John G. Carlisle into his doomed campaign as vice president hopeful.

    Persistent legend has it that Cleveland’s secretary acerbically relayed the news to him; “Mr. President, I regret to inform you that you have won the Democratic nomination.”

    Perhaps the most enthusiastic party going into the elections was the Socialist Labor Party. They maintained no hope of victory, of course, but the ’94 midterms had so boosted them in the public eye, even the prospect of nominating a presidential candidate as any more than a token gesture was stirring.

    The candidate ultimately lighted upon was Charles H. Matchett, with Emil Seidel, a little known German-American socialist from Pennsylvania as his vice presidential pick. Others were considered, such as Clarence Darrow, the man who’d unsuccessfully defended the life of Eugene Debs in federal court and become something of a hero himself for it in left-wing circles, and Edward Bellamy, who had some years before written a wildly popular book imagining a future America organized along utopian socialist lines. Daniel DeLeon, the party’s irascible grand old man, would surely have run himself except that he was not American born. Darrow declined and Bellamy was ultimately found wanting. So, Matchett it was.

    The campaign was a tumultuous one.

    McKinley focused his campaigning on ‘sound money’, firing constant broadsides at Bryan’s championship of silver and denunciations of eastern financiers. The Populist platform was a ‘recipe for economic ruin’ as the Republicans put it. Bryan was tarred as a dangerous radical, the speeches he’d made expressing sympathy for the rebel workers of ’94 were ceaselessly hauled out, chopped apart, and sifted through for suitably out of context quotes that might paint him as some bomb-hurling anarchist.

    Bryan banged on his populist drum, railing against the ‘dictatorship of capital’ that McKinley represented. Though he could not lay the blame directly at the feet of his opponent for the carnage of two years before, since after all, that was the burden of Cleveland and the Democrats, he did his best to obliquely suggest a relationship, mentioning often ‘the ruins of Chicago’ or ‘the bloodshed in New Orleans’. Campaigning in his strongholds of the west and Midwest, he asked poor farmers and urban laborers if they would like to ‘face down the bayonets of the soldiers your own taxes have armed’, as did ‘the men of Chicago’.

    Everyone seemed to have forgotten that the Democratic Party, and Grover Cleveland, still existed.

    It was quite an ignominious tumble; some Democrats openly wished for more excoriating attacks from McKinley and his partisans, just to feel they were worth the consideration.

    Cleveland hardly campaigned at all, occasionally huffing from crowd to crowd in the Midwest or the south, delivering a rambling speech in which he neither promised nor denied much of anything, and then disappearing again to scattered applause.

    One Democrat that heard him speak in Charleston lamented that he’d heard ‘a fitting eulogy for our party’.

    It was not quite clear what Cleveland’s platform was, or if he even really had one to speak of. The platform drafted upon his nomination stood by ‘sound money’, just as did McKinley’s, though there were also some vague, noncommittal concessions to ‘other, legitimate interests’. It pointedly ignored what was on everyone’s mind: the risings of ’94 and their handling.

    The Socialist Labor Party chugged along in fourth place, issuing blistering attacks on all sides (save on Bryan, who endured criticism from his left, but generally mild criticism). And it was the campaign of the socialists that resulted in the most excitement.

    As a sort of stunt, Matchett led a procession to lay wreaths at Haymarket Square, now the twice connected with labor martyrs. As expected, the crowd was brusquely dispersed by the Chicago police. Later, at a Union hall elsewhere in the city, Emil Seidel blasted their treatment, reminding his audience that unless they remained vigilant, ‘we shall see another‘94’. And yet, some noted, that proclamation occasionally sounded less like a warning than a triumphant promise.

    ’We shall see another ’94,’ thunders the wild Dutchman to his assembly of bobbing heads and red flags,” grumbled the Chicago Tribune. “And wordlessly appended to that promise is another; ‘and this time we shall win!’”

    After a fiery speech by renowned economist Henry George (who was not quite a socialist, but was sympathetic, and supporting the party in the coming election), in St. Louis, with its large, often radical immigrant communities, two Hungarian workmen murdered a third man, who they recalled as a ‘scab’ in ’94. George was summarily ‘escorted’ out of St. Louis by police, and further mass gatherings of socialists proscribed.

    The Republicans, though primarily focused on the insurgent threat of Bryan, occasionally saved a wary look over their shoulders for the Socialists. “Creeping anarchy,” McKinley warned in one address to a packed New York music hall.

    The nation finally went to the polls in November. As almost all had expected, McKinley scored a handy victory.

    He scooped up 45.2% of the popular vote, though he received an overwhelming majority of 273 electoral votes.

    Bryan came in second place, with 27% of the popular vote, and 98 electoral votes.

    Cleveland crashed to a pitiful 16.7%, and took 76 electoral votes, by managing to just barely hold together most of the old south under the Democrats, with the notable exception of Georgia, which gave its 13 electoral votes to Bryan.

    The socialists managed to net an impressive (and to many, frightening) 7.3% of the popular vote, primarily concentrated in the northern industrial belt, certain western mining areas, and a few southern cities.

    McKinley ascended to the presidency, the Democrats retreated to mourn their collapse, while the socialists and populists rubbed their hands and anticipated the next four years—failing to reach the presidency hardly felt like a defeat for such spectacular up and comers.

    In his inaugural address, McKinley promised peace both abroad and at home.
     
    Last edited:
    INTERLUDE: Specter over Europe
  • 1894 found Europe, in the main, at peace. Over the course of the 19th century, the mad patchwork quilt of principalities, kingdoms, and duchies had faded away in favor of a continent made up of consolidated national states helmed by sober-minded ministers. The Crimean War and a number of more minor conflagrations aside, the guns had been silent since the fall of Napoleon. Those wars that did break out, such as the fighting that resulted in Italian unification, intermittent dynastic squabbling in Spain, or the decisive contest between France and the newborn German Empire, tended to be brief, almost proper affairs.

    It was nearly a half century since ’48 and twenty years since the Paris Commune, and the ghost of revolution did not hover so heavy over the governments of Europe. Trade and migration bound the nations ever closer together. The continent’s vital, aggressive energies were directed outwards, towards the bullying of China or the division of Africa. No one could conceive of another bloodbath on the scale of Napoleon’s wars.

    This was the Europe upon which word of the American turmoil fell. And on no country did it fall harder than on Britain.

    The destinies of the United Kingdom and the United States were inextricably intertwined, if sometimes fraught. After all, the American republic had been founded and was primarily peopled by Anglo-Saxons. There was much sense of cultural and racial affinity, and economic ties across the Atlantic were increasingly tight.

    So, within an hour of the first reports from Chicago reaching Britain, the London Stock Exchange had crashed hard. No great economic catastrophe resulted, since the insurrection was contained within two weeks, but England still sat uneasy.

    Queen Victoria drafted a letter of condolence to Cleveland, though at the urging of Prime Minister Primrose she struck the paragraph outright congratulating the American president on his suppression of the ‘rebellion’. In conversation the long-reigning monarch referred to the rebel workers as ‘beasts’ and ‘Jacobins’.

    The conservative strata of society naturally greeted the news with horror. The Times of London referred to ‘wild communards and negroes’ in the streets of New Orleans. Primrose and the indomitable Salisbury, then opposition leader, briefly joined hands to denounce the carnage across the ocean and radicalism in general. But that moment of bipartisanship was fleeting, and soon Salisbury was hurling accusations in the House of Lords that the liberals’ long-sought Home Rule for Ireland might very well ‘make Belfast another Chicago’.

    The Daily Telegraph reminded readers of the massive 1889 London dockworkers’ strike, wherein the city’s stevedores had scored a smashing victory over the employers, and the ranks of the General Labourer’s Union had swelled. The workers had won their pay raise without bloodshed, but the Telegraph darkly wondered whether ‘the next such affair mightn’t more closely resemble Debs’ commune’.

    Such was the reaction of the conservative middle and upper classes. The reaction within Britain’s burgeoning labor movement was quite different. The Labour Party had yet to spring into existence—its germ existed within the Trades’ Union Congress and the handful of ‘Lib-Lab’ MPs in parliament, Liberal Party representatives with a special orientation towards the working class, generally sponsored and supported by a particular trade union.

    These relatively conservative forces had somewhat muted reactions to the American troubles. Randal Cremer, an old labor activist and abolitionist, and now Lib-Lab representative in the House of Commons, took the middle road many did. In parliament, he criticized the ‘savagery’ displayed by the revolutionaries, but also pointed to the ‘fount of misery’ that were so many working-class communities.

    Even this even-handed take was too much for some—the Telegraph condemned his speech as ‘irresponsibly radical’.

    Havelock Wilson, elected as an ‘independent labour’ candidate from Middlesborough, took a similar tack. He vocally rejected violence but warned that such convulsions were ‘the inevitable conclusion’ of governments which ignored the needs and interests of their most destitute citizens.

    But there were more radical voices in the circles of British labor. Trade unionism in the British Isles had historically been a phenomenon of skilled craftsmen, generally more interested in maintaining their own positions than in structural change, and disdainful of ‘common’ labor. In the late 1880s and early 1890s this was changing, with the rise of the ‘new unionism’ such as the General Labourer’s Union, which directed themselves to unskilled, unorganized workers. Most ‘new unions’ took a far more radical line than the constituents of the TUC, usually advocating socialism of some form or another.

    Closely tied with the ‘new unions’ was the Social Democratic Federation, the creature of energetic communist Henry Mayers Hyndman. He had formed the SDF in 1881 to popularize the doctrines of Karl Marx in the United Kingdom, and hopefully lead the English working classes to the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’. His comrades included Marx’s daughter Eleanor, but through its early years the SDF was a politically irrelevant organization of a few dozen.

    Hyndman greeted the news from America with delight, declaring that ‘Chicago is a signal to the workers of the world!’

    The middle-class Fabian Society, dedicated towards ‘evolutionary socialism’, which would ultimately replace capitalism through gradual change, had more mixed reactions. Their socialism was a respectable, pacific one. Beatrice Webb, one of the society’s leading lights, called America’s ‘Red Summer’, both ‘spectacular’ and ‘tragic’.

    Radicalism was also blooming in the north of England, spurred on by such papers as Robert Blatchford’s the Clarion, which declared that ‘the workers of America are ahead of the workers of Britain, and we had best make up the distance’. Someone subsequently tried to set fire to the offices of the Clarion.

    Blatchford was one of the men behind the foundation of the Independent Labour Party, which would soon seek separation from the liberals.

    Red ’94 certainly spurred much condemnation and acclamation in Britain, but most Britons seemed to believe it was a singular explosion and hoped it portended nothing more.

    At least one man in England disagreed.

    That was Friedrich Engels, the long-time friend and collaborator of Karl Marx. Marx was, in the summer and fall of 1894, more than a decade dead, and Engels was to follow him within the year.

    Exhilarated by the news from America, the aging and cancer-stricken Engels penned his final work, the dryly titled Vindication of Scientific Socialism. The booklet, about 90 pages long in its original edition, viciously skewered the many critics of Marx, who asserted his predictions had failed and his theories been proven false. Engels begged to differ.

    The 1889 stevedore’s strike of London, and now the revolt of the American working class demonstrated that, ‘as the law of history directs, the workingmen of the advanced countries are at the vanguard of the workers of the whole world.’ He expected these were only the first sparks of a conflagration that would engulf the Anglo-American sphere, and in the end establish between them the long awaited international socialist republic, that would then blaze a trail to communism for the whole world to follow. ‘Where are the scoffers now,’ he demanded, ‘who insisted the passage of time only ever improved the lot of the proletariat? Where are the constitutionalist cretins who insisted the workers could never, and would never conquer power by force of arms?’

    Vindication of Scientific Socialism was a best-seller, and Engels, evidently satisfied that the working class was marching on to victory, died the following August.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Across the channel, the year found France in a rather more hectic state than her old rival. That June, as the events of the Red Summer unfolded, the French President Carnot had been assassinated by an Italian anarchist, horrifying the whole nation.

    The news from America seemed of a kind with such radicalism, and the new president Perier expressed solidarity with France’s old ‘sister republic’, because France too knew the horrors of ‘the Commune’.

    Among the very Parisian workers whose fathers (or they themselves) had participated in the Commune, the mood was somewhat different. A demonstration in the radical 18th Arrondissement of militant workers crying ‘vive l’Amérique!’ was broken up by police.

    The Blanquist Revolutionary Committee crowed that the ‘spirit of the Commune has been carried across the sea’. The young reactionary anti-Semite and future head of Action Française, Charles Maurras agreed, and saw in it a ‘Jewish element’, the same he saw at work in France, behind Jacobinism, socialism, and the republic itself.

    But France was soon deluged with its own troubles, when the seminal Dreyfus Affair broke on the nation that fall. The affairs of America seemed more distant than ever. For now.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    The German Empire in 1894 was a country on the rise. It had not even existed until 1871, when Bismarck had at last welded the disparate little states of the defunct German Confederation into a unitary entity under the Hohenzollern King turned Emperor. The old Prussian martial prowess, now leavened with the manpower of southern Germany, made the Kaiser’s army without a doubt the finest on the continent. Economically, the empire was no slouch. Her industry was second only to that of Great Britain, and she was fast catching up. The year prior, 1893, had seen Germany overtake Britain in steel production for the first time.

    Less flattering to the Kaiser and the upper classes was the fact that Germany had perhaps the best organized working class in Europe, and certainly the mightiest social democratic party.

    The Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) had been founded in 1863 by the great German socialist Ferdinand Lasalle. It had suffered much persecution under Bismarck but been finally legalized in 1890. Since then it had advanced in leaps and bounds, easily capturing the vote of Germany’s ever-expanding industrial proletariat, and emerging as the largest party in the country.

    But the SPD was frustrated. The Kaiser, the Junker lords, and the emerging lords of modern industry, refused to see the social democrats as anything but a subversive enemy. They might be legal, but they were still viewed as revolutionaries in parliamentary clothing (as, indeed, many of them were). They were not considered ‘German’, but rather the antithesis of the true German nation founded upon family, property, and tradition.

    Many of the German Empire’s federal divisions, most importantly Prussia (by far the largest, containing half the country’s population) maintained a three-tiered franchise. Similar to the old French estates, it afforded equal representation to three classes, from the wealthiest to the poorest. This meant less than 5% of the population held the same power at the ballot box as another 90%. Thus, though the social democrats were the largest party in Germany, and in any proportional system would have held a parliamentary plurality at the very least, they were instead relegated to a perpetual minority in the Reichstag.

    By 1894, the SPD had settled in for an existence as a constitutional socialist party, though their platform still called for the communal administration of production. Despite the disdain of most every other grouping and association in Germany, the SPD stood candidates for elections, entered the Reichstag, and worked peacefully towards their goals.

    But the social democrats, including their leader August Bebel, never forget the insurrectionary roots of the workers’ movements, and could even display sentimental inclinations towards revolutionary action.

    Through the summer and into the fall of ’94, many German workers went through the streets of Berlin or Hamburg with red white and blue crepe pinned to their lapels, in a show of support for the American rebels. The Prussian secret police noted with dismay that ‘there is much sympathy for the American insurgents among the lower classes’.

    Taking advantage of the news from America, in October of 1894, the Conservatives and the Center Party joined together and attempted to renew the ‘Anti-Socialist Laws’ of the deposed Chancellor Bismarck, which had all but outlawed the SPD for more than a decade. In response, Bebel stood up and gave a speech in which he warned that suppression of labor’s peaceful organization would lead exactly to the terrible revolution his opponents feared.

    He was shouted down amid calls for his arrest.

    The conservatives failed to push through the anti-socialist laws. But they would try again.
    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    The further east one went, the less relevant happenings across the Atlantic became. Eastern Europe sometimes seemed a world apart from the continent’s western half, let alone the United States.

    Most of the continent east of the Elbe was under the rule of three tottering empires: the Austrian, the Russian, and the Ottoman. Modernity and industry were only just making its inroads, and the great bulk of the population still worked the land in rural torpidity as their fathers had for centuries before.

    In the sprawling expense of Russia, under its newly ascended but yet-uncrowned young autocrat Nicholas II, most of the tens of millions of peasants that were the majority of the empire’s people would have never heard of America’s Red Summer. For them, even the affairs of the capital, St. Petersburg, often seemed like the concerns of an alien world.

    But Vladimir Ulyanov was not most Russians.

    The young Marxist was not yet twenty-five, but already immersed in Russia’s vibrant, if tiny, revolutionary underground. He had already been expelled from university for radical agitation and had now formed a small clique of self-proclaimed social democrats in St. Petersburg.

    Engaging in vigorous debate with fellow revolutionaries, Ulyanov, who was not yet Lenin, already demonstrated the ferocity and force of personality that would propel him to the heights he would one day reach.

    In the summer of ’94, Ulyanov was dazzled by the reports of the American revolts, and wrote his first widely published screed, Chicago and What it Means for the Proletarians of the World, that fall.

    The work was a stinging rebuke to those Russian Marxists he determined inordinately enamored with the peasantry as the instrument of revolution. The unrest in America, Ulyanov insisted, demonstrated that Marx had been correct. The industrial laborer was the engine of revolution. Just as Marx had predicted, the fire of revolution was first being kindled in the ‘advanced countries’ of America, England, and Germany. And so would be the case in Russia. The peasant would at best serve as a helpmeet for the revolutionary worker.

    It was in the aftermath of a vicious debate with a Narodnik activist over the significance (or lack thereof) of the American rebellions, which spiraled into a brawl, that Ulyanov was arrested for the first time. With Chicago and another recent work of his, What the "Friends of the People" Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats as evidence, Ulyanov received the first of his many sentences courtesy of the tsarist regime, and was exiled to Siberia forthwith.

    Later in life, Lenin would often joke that he was ‘arrested for the sake of the American Revolution’ as a young man.

    But for the time being, all of this was largely insular, academic socialist squabbling. Russia seemed, of all European countries, the unlikeliest to ever adopt socialism. It was derided by continental socialists as a backward, stupid, ‘oriental’ despotism. Nearly half the population was illiterate. What little industry the country maintained was concentrated in a few great urban centers like St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Kiev. The country had not even undergone the ‘bourgeois revolution’ orthodox Marxist theorists (including Lenin) insisted was a necessary precondition for socialism. The autocracy, represented by its new (and many hoped, especially able) tsar, sat firmly in the saddle, and it did not appear in danger of falling out any time soon.
     
    Last edited:
    The King of Coke
  • Henry Clay Frick was born to parents of Swiss-German descent in 1849, in west Pennsylvania coal country. He displayed an impressive business acumen from a young age, serving as an accountant in one of his grandfather’s distilleries, and by the time he was a young man had vowed to die a rich one.

    The clear-eyed Frick had little taste for farming or wine and set his sights instead on the future. Pennsylvania in the years of the mid-19th century was a national center of the burgeoning steel industry. Steel, which is really a tougher alloy of iron, had existed for centuries, but its production had never been profitable, until the introduction of the Bessemer converter by its titular inventor in the mid-1850s. By forcing air through molten iron, Bessemer’s ‘beehive’ furnaces removed impurities at a rate fast enough to make the production of steel not only profitable, but fantastically so.

    Also critical to this process was ‘coke’, a type of dense, hard coal which, when introduced to the furnace and mingled with the iron, helps to draw off the impurities and create an especially hardy final product. The greater part of the nation’s coke fields was situated here, in western Pennsylvania.

    A new age had dawned, and the young Frick saw it.

    When, with the assistance of a few cousins, he entered the coke business not long after his twentieth birthday, he was a short man (hardly over five-foot three), but wiry and strong. He was generally considered handsome, with a thick black beard and sharp granite eyes that impressed many a contemporary with their strength.

    By thirty-five he had secured a near-monopoly over the coke business, made himself a millionaire, and picked up the grand and well-deserved sobriquet ‘the King of Coke’.

    It was a comfortable existence, but Frick was ambitious, and saw no reason to content himself when he did not have to.

    And in 1881, he met Andrew Carnegie.

    Each of the two men saw an imperfect reflection of himself in the other. They were both of recent European extraction (though Frick was native-born), and Carnegie was still given to regular visits to his Scottish homeland. They were both ‘self-made’ men, as much as one could be at the time, who’d started with a handful of thousands and turned them into millions. They both had the sort of drive that characterized the day’s ‘captains of industry’. And they needed each other.

    Carnegie was looking to expand into steel from his start in railroads and telegraph lines. But to make steel, he needed coke, and that was Frick’s domain.

    The amicable Scot did most of the talking, but by the end Frick was convinced, and the two men entered into a fateful partnership, with each becoming part-holder of the other’s firm. Soon enough, Frick’s sharp mind, knack for accounting, and blunt-nosed style prevailed upon Carnegie, who made him chairman of Carnegie Steel.

    Frick proved an able chairman, but sometimes a crude and autocratic one. He had little time for nonsense or dithering, whether it came from business partners, business rivals, or his own workmen.

    Under this duumvirate, Carnegie Steel and Frick Coke piled up the gold, and this was in no small part thanks to Frick’s ability as chief manager of the companies.

    Then came Homestead.

    Homestead was a little town in western Pennsylvania, situated along the Monongahela River. In 1883, Carnegie bought out the local steel works, which the town depended upon for sustenance.

    The life of a 19th century steelworker was no easy one. Men worked twelve-hour shifts in hideous heat, pouring and stirring molten steel that left few men unburned by the time they retired (if they ever did). Every laborer knew at least one horror story of a man who’d tripped or stumbled, and fallen headlong into a pit of bubbling metal, never to be seen again. Many Americans would not do such grueling work, and it often fell to foreign-born migrants, Poles, Italians, and especially Hungarians (which gave ‘alien’ laborers the general nickname ‘hunkies’), for whom even such conditions were preferable to the grinding poverty they’d left behind in Europe.

    It was little different at the Homestead factory, save for one thing: Carnegie had earlier negotiated an agreement with the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steelworkers, allowing them exclusive representation of the mill’s workers, and input when it came to the setting of annual wage scales. The work was still grueling, to be sure, but it was that much better than at many non-union mills.

    Things chugged along until the summer of 1892, when Carnegie and Frick, in the face of falling profits, decided wages had to fall along with them.

    Naturally, the workers did not take this kindly.

    When negotiations with Frick, who was administering the plant while Carnegie was away in Scotland, foundered, the workers walked off the job.

    Months earlier, sure that such an action was coming, Frick had commissioned the construction of a ‘great wall’ around the property boundaries of the factory, complete with watchtowers and barbed wire. The precautions were meant to keep striking workers from interfering with the factory’s operation.

    Now, indeed, the angry workers surrounded ‘Fort Frick’, demanding he and Carnegie come back to the table, and keeping a sharp eye out for the scab labor they were sure was incoming.

    As it turned out, Frick did not call in scab labor—at least not yet. He called in the Pinkertons.

    The Pinkerton Detective Agency was a private organization—whence comes the term ‘private eye’, from their calling cards, which depicted a disembodied eyeball gazing at the viewer—that had made its name providing intelligence to President Lincoln and his generals in the dark days of the civil war. But ever since then, they had built a reputation for less savory work—union busting.

    When the local sheriff failed to disperse the workers, now armed and surrounding the mill, as well as garrisoning the roads out of town to prevent interference, Frick hired 300 Pinkertons and associated toughs to take care of the matter and open the way for non-union labor to pick up the strikers’ slack.

    They arrived on a barge from Pittsburgh on 6 July, armed with Winchesters and pistols, and attempted to force their way onto the company dock. There, a mass of thousands of workers, similarly equipped, was waiting. In a last-ditch attempt to avert bloodshed, Hugh O’Donnell, head of the strike committee, begged the Pinkertons not to come ashore, warning he would not be responsible for their lives if they did. The Pinkertons’ commander replied that if the workers did not lay down their arms and clear the way immediately, he would ‘mow every one of you down’.

    In the ensuing gun battle, which lasted for hours, ten men died; seven strikers and three Pinkertons.

    The hired guns ultimately surrendered, were hauled onto the shore, and imprisoned, and the workers luxuriated in their great victory over what they regarded as little less than an invading army.

    Then Frick was nearly assassinated.

    On 26 July, not two weeks after the bloodshed at Homestead, a Russian Jew and anarchist named Alexander Berkman attempted to gun down Frick in his Pittsburgh offices. When the bullets failed to kill him outright, Berkman drew a blade and attempted to run his quarry through. But the King of Coke wrestled him to the ground and, with the help of others present, disarmed him.

    A policeman arrived, armed, and seeming ready to shoot Berkman on the spot. Frick, still bleeding demanded that he be ‘left to the law’, but that his head be raised, so Frick could ‘see his face’.

    The assassination attempt greatly reduced sympathy for the strikers at Homestead, though there was no connection between the rather neurotic anarchist and his girlfriend Emma Goldman on the one hand, and the men at the mill on the other.

    It had the dual effect of raising sympathy for the company and Frick, of whom the Pittsburgh Post said: ‘you may say what you like about Frick, he is a brave man.’

    For Carnegie’s part, he at least claimed a deep regret over the events at Homestead, lamenting that things might have gone differently had he been there.

    That irked Frick, who, despite—or perhaps because of—his brush with death, plainly denied he had any regrets. It was not that he enjoyed bloodshed, he assured. But the factory was company property. The workers could quit if they so desired, but they had no lawful right to prevent the company disposing of its property as it saw fit. The Pinkertons had every lawful right to bring the plant back on line, even at gunpoint. It was tragic that men had died, certainly, but if the strikers had not been so stubborn, all ten lives would have been spared.

    Homestead, and Frick’s refusal to apologize or acknowledge any fault on the part of Carnegie Steel did not endear him to most, despite the outpouring of sympathy after his near assassination. But as always, Frick was steadfast. He was a mighty personality and unlike Carnegie possessed of no pathological need to be loved by all. Even so, probably almost as many admired as hated him.

    But the whole debacle opened a rift between Carnegie and Frick. Carnegie never outright tried to offload all of the blame onto Frick, but he never took any responsibility for himself, either and was fond of pointing out that he had been in Scotland while the tragedy unfolded.

    Frick saw this as cowardice, and it annoyed and upset him. He was in large part responsible for what happened at Homestead, but as he saw it, so was Carnegie, and the difference between the two of them was that Frick had the resolve to own up to it.

    The two men drifted apart over the next two years, but the culmination came with the events of the Red Summer.*

    At the height of the fighting in Chicago, the ever sentimental and optimistic Carnegie cabled Frick from Scotland and said, ‘deeply disturbing hope not as bad as papers say’.

    Frick, who was in nearby Pennsylvania and keeping abreast of the bloody news, cabled back simply and characteristically, ‘is’.

    He saw the whole tragedy as a vindication of his heavy-handed approach of two years earlier. This, he maintained to friends and associates, was what happened when too much ground was ceded to ‘radicals and revolutionists’. If George Pullman had mustered the conviction to force the strikers from his works early in the development of the situation, thousands would still be alive.

    And now, in the heady atmosphere that followed those days, he had an audience.

    It is not known when Frick decided to enter into politics, though it was probably at the behest—at least in part—of longtime friend and partner Andrew Mellon.

    A popular but probably apocryphal story has Frick, Mellon, Frick’s wife Adelaide, and a few friends sitting about in the salon of a Pittsburgh townhouse, with Frick ranting against the incompetence of Cleveland that had allowed the strike to balloon into all-out rebellion. He opined that he could ‘do ten times better’, upon which Adelaide is supposed to have said, ‘well, say, Henry. Why don’t you?’ When Frick laughed it off, Mellon interjected and agreed with Adelaidel ‘Why don’t you, Henry?’.

    In 1895, he decided he was going to run for Governor of Pennsylvania the following year. Mellon supported him, as did Phipps, another critical member of the Carnegie clique.

    Carnegie himself was aghast. He claimed it was because he dreaded to lose Frick as his right hand—but Frick suspected, perhaps with cause, that Carnegie was simply determined to keep them hitched together, lest an independent Frick prove his better.

    Frick was determined. Carnegie gave him an ultimatum: drop this political dream or be expelled from the company’s board and lose his shares.

    It was something that could be done. When Carnegie Steel had been formed years earlier, Carnegie had included a clause in its founding contract which allowed three-fourths of the board to oust in a vote any given member and force him to sell the shares he held. It had been introduced just for situations like this, so that if needed, Carnegie could easily rid himself of troublesome partners.

    He had never imagined it might be used against him.

    But used against him it was.

    Frick deftly outmaneuvered his former friend and partner. He had already won to his side Mellon and Phipps, and the three men got to work on the rest of the board.

    Carnegie set a date, 5 July, 1895, for a convocation of the shareholders at which he intended to make one last heartfelt plea to Frick, and if he continued on this course, to be rid of him.

    Much to his shock, the board instead met three days early, and a stunned Carnegie looked on helplessly as Frick and his allies voted him out of his own company.

    He was left out in the cold, with a few million dollars’ worth of his shares as consolation, worth far less than the actual market value of the stock he’d owned, thanks to his own distaste for regular recapitalization.

    Of course, Carnegie was still vastly richer than most Americans, but he felt as if he was the victim of highway robbery, and he would never forget it.

    So, as the Pittsburgh Post would put it, Frick was now ‘ruler of a dual monarchy’. He was ‘the King of Coke and the Sultan of Steel’.

    And now he went on the warpath.

    It was easy enough to cinch the Republican nomination for governor. He was already a household name, even if that name was often spoken in less than glowing tones. His denunciations, often printed in the Post, of ‘red radicals’ made him popular with conservative elements in the party, and even some among the Democrats. Conscious of the growing influence of the SLP among laborers in west Pennsylvania, Frick promised to 'curb the influence of alien subversives on honest workingmen'. The campaign advertisements he took out in Pittsburgh's papers read, 'Frick for fairness and order'.

    He outspent Robert Pattison, the Democratic nominee, by nearly 3:1. Ironically, he was aided by the foul taste the Democrats had left in the mouths of many after Cleveland’s suppression of the rising. Many of the Democrats’ constituents stayed home, particularly working-class voters, but there was little effect on the Republican electorate.

    Frick was elected twenty-first governor of Pennsylvania in November 1896, just as McKinley ascended to the white house.

    At his victory speech, he was naturally compelled to extoll the President Elect, who was of course a member of his own party. But he set the tone for the next thirty years of his political career when he tempered that endorsement of McKinley with a warning that both parties were ‘dangerously blind’.

    “It does no good,” Frick said, “mumbling about silverites or goldbugs, or indeed about foreign wars, when America sits upon a volcano of anarchy”. Red ’94, he said, “has ripped the mask from these gruesome radicals. Unless you wish to see Chicago recreated in every city across the land, you must understand that first and foremost, this alien menace must be extirpated—the life of the Republic depends upon it. Then can we talk about sound money and tariffs all we like.”

    The King of Coke and the Sultan of Steel had climbed another rung.

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    *pretty much all as OTL up to this point
     
    Lattimer
  • McKinley’s presidency was inevitably colored, as any man’s presidency would be, by the rising labor militancy through the United States, and the inevitable backlash of propertied interests.

    He hoped, as most presidents do, for a fairly peaceful first term. His first act was to raise tariffs to more than 50%, just as he had promised to do, much to the hooting and booing of the Populists and Democrats.

    Then, less than a year into his first term, the specter of ’94 returned.

    In late August of 1897, miners near Hazelton, Pennsylvania, struck for better wages, and many hitherto unorganized laborers affiliated to the United Mine Workers. Attempts to recruit immigrant workers, mostly Slavs and Germans, as scabs, failed when they instead defected to the strikers. The mines were quickly shut down.

    The local sheriff deputized a posse of about 100 men to take the situation in hand. On 10 September, they met a column of some 600 miners marching on the town of Lattimer to help organize another UMW local.

    When the workers refused to disperse, the posse opened fire. But this time, remembering well the lessons of Chicago and New Orleans, the miners were armed, too. They fired back.

    When the dust cleared there were forty-five corpses: twenty-seven miners and thirteen sheriff’s deputies.

    The posse broke and ran, and the miners resumed their triumphant march on Lattimer.

    When they arrived, toting Winchesters, still flecked with the dust of battle, and some of them with blood, the Coal and Iron Police and the Sheriff’s deputies already on the spot lost their nerve and scattered as well.

    The news rocketed across the state, and then the country. The hysteria was immediate. It was ‘red revolution again’, the Chicago Tribune put it. ‘The ghost of Debs is not yet laid’, said the New York Times.

    But this was Pennsylvania. And in Pennsylvania, Henry Clay Frick, the villain (or hero, depending on who was asked) of Homestead, was governor.

    A delegation from the miners arrived in Philadelphia, insisting on their right to see the governor, and carrying a set of demands. Frick had them promptly seized and jailed as insurrectionists and did not deign to read whatever demands they had.

    He then wasted no time in calling out the militia.

    2,000 militiamen quickly invested Schuykill County, surrounding the miners’ camp just north of Lattimer. The men were ordered to lay down their arms and surrender.

    The miners deliberated for about three hours, and then stacked their arms and gave themselves up.

    The response, state and nationwide, was elation. The country had watched, paralyzed with terror, fearing another Chicago. Instead, Frick had moved swiftly, acted sternly but not unfairly, and put down the latest ‘insurrection’ in a matter of days, without further spillage of blood.

    He was the man of the hour. McKinley, on routine presidential business heading westward, took a detour and personally stopped by Philadelphia to congratulate him on his ‘adept handling’ of the situation. Thus, was produced the famous photograph of the two men shaking hands. Papers across the country celebrated. The New York Herald, no Republican standard bearer, was compelled to carry as its headline the cheer: “Hurrah for Henry!”

    Of course, Frick could hardly take all the credit for the bloodless conclusion of the whole mess. Had just one of the workers or soldiers possessed an itchy trigger finger, in all likelihood the massacre would have far exceeded Homestead.

    But as fortune had it, there were no itchy trigger fingers to be found, and Frick emerged the man who’d done what Cleveland couldn’t, and dispersed revolutionist rabble without spilling a drop of blood. He was glad to encourage the perception. He had even thrown a sop to the demoralized miners and their supporters by excoriating Sheriff James Martin for his ‘rash action’ that had resulted in the initial gunfight. He then engineered the man’s replacement.

    Still, the avoidance of another ‘commune’ did not ease all minds. The fact that it had happened at all, so soon after the Red Summer, was more than enough to set the conservative population of the United States on edge. The country’s papers almost unilaterally demanded ‘a tougher line on reds and aliens’ as the National Tribune put it. The exceptions were of course, the papers sympathetic to the Socialists, which unanimously denounced ‘the butcher Frick’ (a bit of a non-starter at this point since, regardless of whatever had happened at Homestead five years earlier, he could hardly be faulted for any deaths in the recent turmoil). The mouthpieces of the Populist Party characteristically equivocated and largely remained silent, terrified of seeming either on the side of the business elites that their base so despised, or of incorrigible incendiaries.

    The prevailing mood was that something permanent needed to be done.

    The congressional elections of 1896, often overlooked thanks to the concurrent presidential race, had resulted in a 55th congress of rather interesting composition.

    In the House, the Democrats continued their agonizing slide into political oblivion, with their seat number dropping from 62 to 47 as supporters of free silver and the countryside continued to bolt from what was increasingly seen as the party of ‘Goldbug Grover’.

    The Republicans snatched five of those fourteen seats, but lost one to the populists, bringing them to a total of 215 seats. The populists took the other nine, bringing them up to 61 seats.

    The socialists made the most astonishing gains--they more than doubled their 7 seats of 1894, finishing with 17 in the house.

    The Republicans gained two seats in the Senate, giving them an absolute majority there, as well.

    So, Congress as it stood in the fall of 1897, was thus:

    In the House of Representatives sat 215 Republicans, 47 Democrats, 61 populists, 17 socialists, and 17 independents and members of various smaller parties.

    In the senate sat 52 Republicans, 30 Democrats, five Populists, and three independents or members of smaller parties .

    Thus, the Republicans held a majority in both chambers, and were empowered to do more or less as they pleased.

    And with Frick—one of their own—having smoothly put down more labor troubles in Pennsylvania, and determined to show they could keep a lid on things where Cleveland and his Democrats could not, the Party of Lincoln decided it time to deal with the red menace.

    A bill introduced by Illinois congressman Joseph Cannon provided for those who “conspire or form a combination with the ultimate aim of the subversion of the government of the United States… or of interfering with the lawful exercise of property right” to be lawfully “put down” by militia or the military.

    In short, it was a retroactive legitimization of what had happened in ’94, and also a warrant to employ the country’s armed forces in the same fashion again in the future. Though the bill did not say so, of course, it was very clearly aimed at restricting the functions and activities of labor unions like the now proscribed AFL.

    It was referred to as the ‘Fourth Enforcement Act’ in hopes of tying it to the fondly remembered (among Republicans) ‘Enforcement Acts’ that President Grant had used to snuff the life out of the Ku Klux Klan and the Knights of the White Camelia in the days of Reconstruction.

    The bill generated fierce debate in the house. It was supported by the great majority of Republicans, with only thirty-two opposing and eight abstaining, mostly Silver Republicans and their allies. A non-negligible number of the few Democrats left in congress, primarily the conservative ‘Goldbugs’ like Arthur Gorman and David Hill, also supported the bill.

    The Populists, to a man, opposed it. So, naturally, did the socialists.

    Before the vote, the fiery Thomas E. Watson of Georgia, the golden boy of the Populists in the House, stood and delivered an impassioned speech denouncing the act. Though the Populists had tended to disdain the industrial and unskilled labor the act’s provisions would disproportionately affect, Watson saw in it the further march of the ‘money interests’ his party was formed to combat.

    “You think that if you cut out the workman’s tongue you will tame him. Instead, you will leave him only his fists, and he will use them. You mean to hold off forever another Chicago. Instead, you will create dozens.”

    He was cheered by the Socialists and the Populists and hooted down by the Republicans and Democrats.

    The final vote was 205 for, 137 against, and 15 abstaining.

    It passed the senate far more easily, becoming law with exceptional speed in January 1898.

    Labor despaired at the passage of the act. The AFL had been outlawed for nearly two years, now. Gompers was hard at work attempting to build a new organization from the ground up, but it was hard going. In 1898, the AFL’s ersatz replacement, the National Workingman’s Association, had only 20,000 members against the 300,000 the AFL had boasted at its peak just before the Red Summer. This despite (or perhaps because of) its fervent attempts to distance itself from Debs, the ’94 risings, and radicalism of any sort.

    And now, it looked like the government was prepared to ensure any efforts at reorganization would be promptly nipped in the bud.

    Indeed, in the weeks and months following its passage, emboldened bosses slashed wages across the country, but particularly in the northern industrial belt. When a Buffalo steel mill reduced its workers’ pay by 35%, citing cost cuts, the laborers walked off the job and formed a strike committee. The militia was duly called in, the workers dispersed at bayonet point, and the ‘ringleaders’ arrested.

    The message was clear: there would never be another Chicago, not ever.

    Even Gompers’ new NWA found itself relentlessly hounded by state and national authorities, despite its emphatic moderation.

    On 17 February 1898, the NWA attempted to hold its ‘first national congress’ in Manhattan’s lower east side, only to find the music hall they had appropriated for the occasion was barred by city police upon their arrival, and they were not permitted entry, on grounds of ‘unlawful assembly’.

    Gompers himself often complained that he was tailed by police and private spies.

    The lid was clamped down tight on labor, but the pot was still boiling, and in fact, boiling ever hotter.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    SEC 3. …That any person or group of persons within any state or territory of the United States shall conspire or form a combination with the ultimate aim of the subversion of the government of the United States, or of opposing by force of arms the government of the United States, or of preventing the execution of the laws of the United States…or of interfering with the lawful exercise of property right…whether by attempt to damage such private property beyond use, or by attempt to deprive the property’s lawful owner of his property by subterfuge or force of arms, or by attempt to prevent the property’s lawful owner from disposing of the property as he sees fit within the confines of the laws of the United States and the laws of the state and district in which he resides, or by attempt to compel others to damage such private property beyond use, or to deprive the property’s lawful owner of his property by subterfuge or force of arms, or by attempt to prevent the property’s lawful owner from disposing of the property as he sees fit within the confines of the laws of the United States and the laws of the state and district in which he resides…it shall be lawful for the federal government of the United States to, by employment of militia or land and naval forces of the United States, forcibly put down such insurrection and combinations.

    Source: Fourth Enforcement Act, often called the ‘Red Act’, which all but outlawed the creation and operation of labor unions in the United States (1898).
     
    Last edited:
    INTERLUDE: the Great Cartels
  • Excerpt from the Fall of the Old Republic-4th Edition. College-level textbook. 1985, Cripple Creek Publishing.



    The Great Cartels

    The late 19th and early 20th centuries were a time of massive industrial concentration. Thomas Jefferson, that most idealistic of the founding generation, had envisioned a farmers’ republic of sturdy yeomen that would work for themselves and for their families. He saw a society that would encourage self-sufficiency and stringently avoid the dangers presented by the accumulation of great wealth on the one side and grinding poverty on the other.

    By the time the smoke of the civil war had settled in the early 1870s, it had become clear this dream was slipping away. Jefferson’s federal republic of independent producers was simply incompatible with the United States’ burgeoning industry. All the bare resources necessary for the development and maintenance of an industrial economy were falling under the sway of a small clique of manufacturers who jealously guarded their newfound preserves and ruthlessly crippled market newcomers.

    The railroad companies were the republic’s first introduction to the mighty trusts that would dominate her by century’s end. A handful of massive corporations soon snapped up nearly all the country’s emerging rail traffic. Cornelius Vanderbilt’s New York Central railroad monopolized travel by train in the northeast, challenged only by the Pennsylvania Railroad, which it eventually absorbed. Over the 1870s and into the 1880s, the avaricious Jay Gould’s Union Pacific devoured the market west of the Mississippi. The Southern Railway soon captured the states of the old Confederacy.

    The rail bosses soon forgot the lofty principles of entrepreneurship and free competition supposed to be sacred to the American way of life—as early as 1877 the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad conspired with its fellows to fix prices and wages at certain agreeable levels, sparking the bloody railroad strike of that year, a prelude to the chaos of 1894.

    This concentration was duplicated in other industries—by 1894 John Rockefeller’s Standard Oil controlled more than 90% of the increasingly crucial commodity’s production in the United States, achieving its dominance by buying out or underselling all would-be competitors.

    America’s steel was soon swallowed up by Andrew Carnegie, but it would not be until his erstwhile friend and partner Henry Frick tore the company out from under him and recreated it as U.S Steel that it would come to be responsible for nearly 100% of American steel production, as it was by 1902.

    Copper, used in the production of countless commodities, but especially crucial to the developing technology of the telephone, was captured by Anaconda Copper, itself in close partnership with Standard Oil.

    The telephone industry itself was soon concentrated under the guiding hand of the American Telephone and Telegraph company, though naturally this concern was formed a few decades later than most of its fellows.

    By the 1890s, there was growing discontent with what was seen as the increasingly dictatorial and incestuous nature of American manufacturing. Industries no longer competed, but rather collaborated. The Rockefellers were major shareholders in Anaconda Copper and various railroads. Carnegie, Frick, and the other steel magnates either owned the coal fields so critical to their operation outright or else were closely partnered with the men that did.

    A worker stricken by starvation wages or hazardous conditions could not simply go off and find a kindlier or fairer employer—for the next employer was in cahoots with the first.

    The solution to many, such as the well-intentioned senator John Sherman, was obvious. These great ‘cartels’ had to be broken up, so that an illusory system of fair and free competition could be restored.

    Few, with the exception of the more forward-thinking socialists recognized in this unprecedented concentration the self-destructive nature of capitalism, which would leave its consolidated concerns ripe for socialization. Lenin would later describe this phenomenon in his Climax of Capitalism, and elaborate on its historically progressive role. But at the time, far more popular was the idea that the wheel of history might be turned back.

    To that end, Sherman introduced in 1890 a congressional act which would illegalize the forming of these overriding monopolies and provide against the ‘restriction of free competition’.

    The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, but within the decade its inadequacy and the hopeless fight against the course of capitalism would become clear. Naturally, capitalists themselves tended to smart under this bill’s implementation, even if it was only rarely applied in practice.

    Yet hardly four years after the bill’s passage, American industrialists were presented with a golden opportunity to do away with even this minimal check on their power.

    The Risings of ’94 were the first instance of organized revolutionary activity among the American proletariat. Though the aftermath of its bloody suppression saw the radicalization of large swathes of the working class, it also created a solidarity among the haute-bourgeoisie previously unseen.

    In 1895, various leading lights of American industry, including Henry Frick, formed a sort of capitalist’s union, meant to advance the interests of capital against those of labor. Various names were considered, but considering the passions aroused by the bloodshed of the previous summer, the frontrunner ‘National Association of Manufacturers’ was deemed insufficiently militant, and ultimately this new organization was christened the ‘League for the Defense of Property’.

    Within a few years, representatives of all the great cartels would sit on its board of directors, including US Steel, Standard Oil, and AT&T.

    Its creation, and the concurrent growth of the SLP, heralded a new era of intensified conflict between capital and labor in the United States.

    The LDP’s first order of business was, of course, the suppression of labor’s bargaining power. It poured gold into the pockets of congressmen who swore to ram through Cannon’s ‘Force Act’. Its various local chapters made sundry contributions to county police or state militia, ensuring, if there was any doubt, that when the knives came out, the forces of order would be on the side of the bosses.

    In a nation shaken by ‘red terror’, where the sympathies of most bourgeois reformers and ‘moderate’ labor activists for socialism had been extinguished by the ghost of revolution, there were few to champion the workers’ cause in the halls of power.

    Though the Sherman Anti-Trust act would not be finally repealed until 1906, it was a dead letter long before then. Perversely, when it was enforced during its sixteen years of life, it was generally implemented against labor unions, which were attacked as ‘combinations’ conspiring to restrict the ‘free competition’ that had long since ceased to exist.

    The LDP increasingly outfitted and trained its own police and even paramilitary forces for the defense of its constituent concerns’ property and operation, with the acquiescence and active cooperation of federal and state authorities. In 1901, Continental Security was formed, with its nucleus the old and infamous Coal and Iron Police of Pennsylvania. CS primarily recruited ex-police and servicemen, and the LDP farmed them out to its various member cartels, which freely used them for the prevention and suppression of labor organization. They rarely encountered trouble from legal authorities, and instead were often deputized by the local sheriff, or inducted into the state militia. In 1904, it was CS men, not militiamen or federal troops, that drew the lion’s share of the blood in cities like Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and St. Louis. By 1908, CS maintained 10,000 permanent employees, with another 25,000 working as ‘contractors’.

    Of course, this strident ruthlessness produced a mirror effect in the ever more militant labor movement. A sort of arms race of brutality and organization ensued. The STLA organized its own 'Spartacus Columns' (named of course, for the rebel slave) from the ranks of union men to fight against CS men and their allies. Firearms ownership among socialists rose dramatically during this era. Assassinations of labor organizers on the one hand and CS chiefs on the other became increasingly common. In 1900, up to 201 deaths nation-wide were connected in some way or another to labor disputes. This number would rise dramatically and more than double by 1904.

    Industry only concentrated further as the institutions of the old republic were eroded. By 1903, on the eve of the disastrous elections of the following year, US Steel had finally captured 100% of the country’s steel production (within a margin of error), and there remained only two railroad concerns worth speaking of from San Francisco to New York (Union Pacific and New York Central, which controlled rail traffic to the west and east of the Mississippi, respectively). Wages fell concurrent with this consolidation, leading in no small part to the economic calamities of the 20th century’s first decade.

    In 1910 the LDP was finally granted a semi-governmental status as the Economic Regulatory Office, with special access to congress and the executive. It was merely the recognition of a long-standing reality; business and state power had abandoned any real pretense of separation many years ago.
     
    Last edited:
    The Growth of the SLP and the STLA
  • The Socialist Labor Party had been formed in 1876, and after a few flickering signs of life in the wake of the 1877 railway strike, spent the next two decades languishing in obscurity and irrelevance. Chronic internecine spats and the sheer lack of appeal the philosophy of socialism seemed to hold for most Americans simply left the party dead in the water.

    In the 1890s, the party came under the powerful influence of the Curaçaoan Daniel De Leon, who soon took control of the SLP’s media apparatus, and thus made himself its de facto leader. DeLeon was a hardnosed, determined follower of the doctrines of Karl Marx. His vigorous personality and force of will pumped new life into a scattered, dissipated party composed largely of German immigrants and their descendants, who were dangerously cut off from the mainstream of American cultural life.

    But the great turn did not come until ’94.

    The SLP fully supported the Pullman strikers from the beginning. When the strike spiraled into rioting which spiraled into insurrection, its meager printing houses across the country churned out broadsheet after broadsheet cheering the rebel workers of ‘the three insurrectionary cities’. De Leon himself called those slain on the barricades of Chicago or San Francisco ‘the flower of the working class’. It strengthened his uncompromising anti-reformist views (he condemned 'parliamentary idiocy' among certain socialists), and compelled him to add as the masthead of the SLP's Daily People the slogan, 'the working class and employing class have nothing in common'.

    When the killing was done, for those horrified and dismayed at the repression, the SLP was the only party that did not cheer the government response or offer mealy-mouthed half apologies like the Populists did. Rather, it unabashedly said: “the workers were right—the bosses were wrong.” This alone was enough to win them a massive groundswell of support from the disgruntled workers and socialist-inclined intellectuals of the United States that felt the ‘Red Summer’ was a personal defeat for them.

    The Socialists, for their part, saw their opportunity and did not neglect to seize it. DeLeon had always been something of a bull-headed, doctrinaire man who did not take kindly to ideological or political dissent. But even he could see that this was the SLP’s great chance to expand beyond its tiny immigrant base and ‘Americanize’ itself. The hope of a true, mass American workingman’s party seemed in reach. Thus he consented for the standing of candidates in the 1896 elections. Of course, he still refused to believe political action within the confines of the bourgeois state could ever produce any real change, much less substitute for organized revolutionary action, but he came around to the possibility that congress might be a useful forum for the 'representatives of the proletariat' to air their grievances and advertise their doctrines to the world.

    So, it was anger over ’94 that won the SLP the astonishing 8.3% in 1896 that rocketed them to national prominence and gave them a voice in congress. But they could not ride on righteous indignation forever, and steps had to be taken to shore up and expand their constituencies.

    The answer was a campaign of aggressive agitation that stretched through ’97 and to the next elections of ’98.

    Socialists in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, New York, Denver, and other strongholds took advantage of the recent influx in members (and thus manpower) to open soup kitchens for the unemployed or underemployed, where a night’s meal was always accompanied by a fiery speech or a pamphlet explaining just how capitalism lay coiled up at the root of any and all suffering. These soup kitchens were often closed under pretext of ‘public health’, which led to certain Socialist wags hanging up signs that read: WARNING! THOSE WHO ENTER MAY BE INFECTED WITH HUMANITY!

    The SLP also worked to assimilate labor unions, whether as corporate bodies or by reaching out to individual workers. The SLP’s affiliated union league was the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance. Ironically, because it had been so small and entirely irrelevant in ’94, and thus played no real part in the drama, it remained legal, unlike the moderate AFL.

    Thus, in a strange twist of fate, the hysterical proscription of the AFL led to an explosion in membership for the much more radical STLA. In 1893, it had much less than 10,000 members (records are spotty). A disproportionate number of these were not workers at all, but socialist intellectuals and sympathizers, largely middle class.

    This began to change in the aftermath of the Red Summer. By 1899, the STLA’s membership had ballooned to nearly 100,000. It would continue to grow in the early years of the 20th century, until its own destruction.

    The increasingly heavy hand of the bosses and the formation of the LDP certainly helped in driving disgruntled workers into the union’s arms. So did the frustratingly stagnant wages in much of the country. The government's increasing unwillingness to intervene in labor disputes on the side of labor, the fresh leeway given to anti-union forces by the Red Act, and many other factors such as a marked drop in foreign investment (primarily from Britain and France) thanks to the recent and growing instability, led to a persistent halt in real wage growth, and even a drop in many parts of the country. The upshot was a fruitful harvest for the SLP.

    Organizers generally toned down the more radical talk of absolute common administration of production or a world socialist republic when trying to rope in prospective Socialists. But much to the relief of DeLeon, Seidel, and the rest of the leadership, most were not scared off once they found out what socialism was ‘really about’.

    Another great boon to the popularity of the SLP and STLA was the entrance of various well-known and admired personalities into the party. In 1897, Edward Bellamy, author of the phenomenally popular utopian novel Looking Backward: 2000-1877 officially joined the party and begin writing editorials for the Daily People. A year later, Clarence Darrow, the silver-tongued country lawyer that had defended Debs in court and counted the executed Governor Altgeld as a personal friend, made his allegiance to the party public. In his state of Illinois and elsewhere in the country, Darrow put his rhetorical skills to good use, denouncing the great capitalists he wryly called ‘the good people’ and expressing a belief in the inevitability of socialist society, as determined by historical law (Darrow was a staunch determinist). The adherence of many middle class intellectuals alongside rank and file workers gave the Socialists an outsized voice in 'respectable' society, as well as access to hitherto unavailable financial resources in the way of donations or membership dues (which were soon scaled according to party members' ability to pay).

    The STLA was especially successful among the steelworkers of Pennsylvania, who would never forget Homestead, and among miners of the same region (and also of nearby West Virginia) with their long and sad history of violent class conflict, stretching all the way back to the storied ‘Molly Maguires’ of the late 1860s. The SLP, which was after all disproportionately German immigrant in composition, also made efforts to reach out to recent arrivals on American shores. Attempts to organize Jewish, Italian, or Hungarian labor proved complex—many of these men and women had come from such desperate poverty that the greediest of American bosses seemed like a benevolent saint—but there were many victories, such as the mass incorporation of largely female and Eastern European New York garment workers into the United Textile Workers union in 1897. First and second generation immigrants remained of outsized importance within the party up to the revolution itself.

    The south was another region the SLP coveted, but it was also the hardest to crack. A great part of the south’s manual labor was performed by black men and women, who proved nearly impossible to organize thanks to the precarious existences they maintained, always balancing on the razor’s edge of poverty and racial terror. To many southern blacks, joining a union simply did not seem worth risking the wrath of boss or landlord. The powerful regional Democratic Party in the south also impeded the mission of the Socialists, rarely taking well to ‘northern and alien agitators’ (which, of course, the party’s emissaries did tend to be) stirring up trouble. Even in a big city like Charleston or Mobile, a socialist organizer was liable to wake up to a note stuck in his door with a knife, demanding he “GET OUT OF TOWN,” and assuring him he “WON’T BE ASKED AGAIN.” Venturing into the countryside could be near-suicidal. They made some small inroads, particularly in the coastal cities like New Orleans and Savannah, but the Socialists’ moment in the sun below the Mason-Dixon line would not come until the drama at Wilmington in November 1898.

    Still, thanks to concentrated effort and a skillful manipulation of the emotions aroused by the sight of fellow workingmen and women shot down in the streets by federal troops the SLP was enabled to build up a real base.

    In 1898, Socialist Victor Berger was elected mayor of Milwaukee. Hundreds of socialist aldermen and local officials were also swept into office across the industrial belt, including several in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, much to the annoyance of Governor Frick.

    With the increase in its share of the national popular vote from the 8.3% they’d won in 1896, to 13.72%, the Socialists picked up 17 new seats, raising their total to 34. It was a fine increase, though certainly aided by the lower general turnout (relative to presidential election years) that was typical for American midterm elections.

    Another jolt to the SLP was the passage of the ‘Red Act’ in 1897 and its implementation in 1898, which was immediately seized upon by bosses and local governments as a license for union busting.

    When a strike committee was broken up by police or militia, its leaders arrested on the grounds of ‘conspiring to interfere with the lawful exercise of property right’, and everyone else sent home, there was always a socialist on hand to feed the festering hatred and explain that there could never be any compromise with capital in the long-term.

    A twenty-year old New York furrier called Lazslo, a Hungarian who’d been kicked out of his NWA local for his radical convictions—was heard to say, once he had ascended to treasurer for the rival STLA-affiliated local—that “the socialists…were the only ones who were really fighting.”

    For the part of Gompers and the NWA, they continued their policy of stringent moderation, counseling an avoidance of strikes if at all possible, and expelling without further consideration any member who exhibited socialist sympathies, or was moved to defend the Red Summer. Gompers went as far as to excuse the Red Act. While he did not outright speak in support of it, he claimed that “it ought not to scare anyone so bad as it does the anarchists.”

    This made it quite easy for the SLP to smear Gompers and his allies as cowards and traitors, the bosses’ lickspittles and loyal opposition. In truth, Gompers was always an honest advocate of the workers and their rights—whether his strategies were misguided or not is a value judgment that cannot be made here, but the accusations that he was in the pay of the ‘mine and steel lords’ or that he’d connived at the arrest of Debs and the Chicago workers’ council in ’94 were entirely untrue.

    Regardless, the vital energy of the SLP, when compared with the apparent decrepit collaborating spirit of the NWA, resonated with many angry young workers, and the end result of all this tireless activism was that the Socialists in 1898—especially in the aftermath of Wilmington—looked forward with great anticipation to the elections of 1900. They still did not imagine they might seize the presidency but allowed themselves to hope—not without reason—that they might at least eclipse the waning Democrats, and take perhaps 20% of the vote, or perhaps even more. And who knew? If an agreeable compact could be concluded with the Populists, perhaps national power was not such a far-fetched dream after all.
     
    Last edited:
    The Midterms of 1898 and the Decline of the Populist Party
  • 1898 dawned well. The economic malaise that had set in back in ’93 seemed to be dissipating; unemployment had dropped to 12% from 18% two years earlier. That was still unacceptably high, but it was progress.

    McKinley’s new tariffs had done much to glut native industry, and even went a ways towards satisfying labor.

    But there was trouble to the south.

    Spain in ’98 was a pale shadow of the mighty power that had tamed the New World and ruled the seas centuries ago. Dynastic strife and economic stagnation whittled away her power on the continent, while the wars against Napoleon stripped away her American holdings one by one. By the late 19th century, the no-longer-great power of Spain clung only to her metropolitan territory, a pitiable scrap of land in Morocco, the Philippines, and the single jewel remaining in her once grand imperial crown: Cuba.

    Cuba was and had been for many centuries a source of great wealth, churning out by sugar by the ton into the markets and the teacups of Europe. Her importance magnified after the loss of St. Domingue to slave rebellion, when she became the Caribbean’s chief supplier of sugarcane. Spain may have lost everything else from Tierra del Fuego to the Rio Bravo, but this island she would not surrender.

    Unfortunately for her, the Cubans disagreed. Strongly.

    A movement towards independence had brewed on the island for many years. It finally exploded in 1868, when the idealistic planter Carlos Manuel de Céspedes freed his hundreds of slaves in a show of commitment and then led an ever-growing band of Cuban rebels against the colonial government. The rising lasted ten years, and left tens of thousands of dead. In the end the Spanish managed to quell the revolt, but not to snuff out the embers of revolutionary yearning.

    In 1895, the Cuban intellectual José Marti led a band of fellow exiled from the United States back to his fatherland, where they raised the standard of revolution once more. Again Cuba was aflame.

    The yanquis watched with keen interest—many an American businessman owned property on the island or invested with those who did. To see the island’s economy wrecked by incessant warfare would not do. Certain humanitarians, also, balked at the cruel treatment meted out by Spanish soldiers to Cuban rebels, and demanded an American intervention on moral grounds.

    Whatever their reasoning, the interventionists all agreed it would be easy: Spain’s empire was a dying empire, her armies would dissolve, her ships would be covered by the sea, and her grip on what remained of the old domains would be broken at last.

    There were, of course, also plenty staunch non-interventionists. Some worried the creation of an ‘American Empire’ would erode Republican liberties and precipitate the same rotting decadence that had destroyed Rome. Some feared Spain was stronger than she appeared at first glance, and that war would result in a humiliating defeat, or at least a grinding, bloody victory. Some did not want to risk bringing large numbers of non-whites under the same government, and others simply thought the US had no right to meddle in the affairs of foreign countries without immediate cause.

    But then there developed an immediate cause.

    In February of 1898, the USS Boston—the same cruiser that had fired on San Francisco during the Red Summer—was at anchor in Havana Harbor. She’d been transferred from the Pacific to Atlantic Squadron in the aftermath of ’94, and now been sent by President McKinley to monitor the situation in Cuba and to establish an advance American presence should relations with Spain quickly deteriorate.

    They did just that on the night of 15 February, when a massive explosion rocked the ship and killed most of its crew, before sending Boston to the bottom of the ocean.

    It is today unclear what caused the explosion—Spanish sabotage or a mine were immediately blamed, of course, but more recent investigation has suggested (as was also suggested at the time by cooler heads) that the most probable cause was an internal boiler accident.

    Nevertheless, outpouring of popular indignation was immense, and there was really no choice but war.

    (A notable exception to that popular indignation was in San Francisco, where news that 'the Boston's gone down' was met with much celebration in certain parts of town. That very few of the men who had shelled the city in '94 would have still been serving aboard the ship four years later did not seem to strike many of these revelers as particularly important).

    A motion for war was presented to congress.

    But this was not a simple congress of Republicans and Democrats, as in years gone by.

    When the motion to declare war was presented to the House, the Populists voted against it 37 to 24. The 17 Socialists voted against it to a man.

    Ten Democrats also voted ‘no’, for a total ‘nay’ vote of 96 against the 261 ‘yes’ votes.

    It passed the Republican-dominated Senate with even greater ease.

    Thanks to the strong majority held by the Republicans, it really hardly mattered what the other parties thought or wanted, but the mere fact that there had been an appreciable resistance to the motion rankled many.

    The Populists were roundly condemned as cowardly or unpatriotic, and this would be one of the factors, among many, that would lead to their downfall.

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Excerpt from Meteor of the Evening: The Populist Party (Alabama Publishing Collective, 2003)

    On 9 September 1894, Bryan wrote to his wife concerning the recent suppression of the three Communes. His letter expressed a deep horror at the conduct of the government, and a deep sympathy for the strikers who had become rebels. “You know I am not an anarchist nor am I inclined towards any communistic school of thought. I am nevertheless overcome with despair. That American workingmen should be shot down in the streets by American soldiers! Does not a man have the right to open his mouth and speak as he believes? Does not a man have the right to demand a living wage? I am given to understand the soldiers of the government fired first. If that is so, does not a man fired upon have the right to return fire? I can hardly now look upon the blue coat of our own army without the bile rising in my throat.”

    The letter did not come to light until many years after his death and indicates somewhat more radical sympathies than those he expressed in public (he never, in any official, public capacity, defended the actions of the rebels of the Red Summer, even when he denounced their repression). It also—though this has been much less commonly noted—may go aways towards explaining the anti-war stance he, and by extension the Populist Party, took in 1898. He was not the only Populist brought about to a dimmer view of United States military might by the events of ’94. Thomas Watson complained to a friend that “it is…a bitter pill to swallow, to understand that our soldiers might be employed—and employed so readily—in such monarchic fashion.”

    Thus, come the clash with Spain, the Populists—or at least a significant number of them—were disillusioned with images of military glory and conquest.

    Compounding this nervous distaste for displays of military might was the question of domestic concerns as against adventuring. The depression of ’93 was receding, but it was not yet gone. There were still plenty of western farmers only just eking out a living as crops rotted in storehouses or remained unsown. Most of the Populists balked at the prospect of funding foreign wars while there remained Americans in such dire straits.

    “Not a single silver coin for guns or warships while a single American farmer cannot raise a crop,” Representative Goodwyn (P-Alabama) stood and pronounced, while Republicans and Democrats alike howled him down.

    The Populists’ setting their faces against a generally popular war is often pegged as the reason for their tumble from relevance, but this is a severe oversimplification. It certainly did not help them at the polls that year, but the SLP gained, despite every one of its congressional representatives voting down the war. Moreover, that the gains of the Populists had stalled out was not immediately apparent until the elections of 1900, and their dissolution until later still.

    In fact, the immediate cause of the Populist Party’s reversal of fortunes was most likely that the depression was receding, though as noted, it was not over. The discovery of gold in the Yukon two years prior had flooded the market with precious metal and given a livening jolt to the listing American economy. Banks found they could lend again, and farmers found they could sell their crops and pay off their loans. Argentina, India, and Eastern Europe had suffered great agricultural failures that year, with drought, hail, and vermin conspiring to precipitously lower output across the globe. Meanwhile, the American wheat yield of 1898 clocked in at 550 million bushels, nearly 20% higher than the average for the past decade. Suddenly the world market was laid wide open for the surplus product of American farmers.

    In short, the Populist’s core constituency, desperate farmers, had just lost the chief reason to vote for them. Even McKinley’s new tariffs, unpopular as they were with the agricultural sector, did not do much to dent the ongoing recovery.

    A final reason for the Populists’ less impressive results in the midterms of ’98 and 1900 was their ostensible ally in congress—the Socialist Labor Party.

    The SLP in 1898 was still largely ignored in the halls of power, save for the occasional wary glance thrown in its direction when an established politician recalled its existence. When it had more than doubled its gains in ’96, after the ’94 surge, they had drawn further frightful looks. But still, the prevailing wisdom was that the SLP was still coasting on the furor following the Red Summer, and that they would soon fade back into oblivion, or at the very worst continue as the radical tail of the Populist Party (but not, certainly, as a tail that would ever wag the dog).

    Now that the Red Act was in effect, it was also dearly hoped the ground-level, direct organization carried out by socialist militants would be neatly nipped in the bud, so that they would be effectively shut out from power on all fronts.

    But it was not to be.

    Many have asked why the Populist Party, a party centered around the weal and woe of the ‘common man’ and defining itself in opposition to moneyed interests splintered and eventually found itself on the ash heap of history while the Socialists, apparently oriented in much the same direction, not only endured but ultimately thrived.

    It must be considered what voter each party appealed to. While there was certainly some overlap, with a number of farmers, particularly in the west and in the industrial belt voting Socialist, and a number of urban laborers, particularly in the cities of the south and the mid-Atlantic, voting Populist, by and large the two parties were defined by an urban-rural split.

    If there was a typical Populist voter, he was an ‘old-stock’ American of English or Scots-Irish ancestry. He was a smallholder who jealously guarded the farm he had either inherited from his father or built up himself. He was staunchly patriotic and deeply distrustful of great cities and the seediness they seemed to breed.

    If there was a typical Socialist voter, he was an immigrant or the son of immigrants, probably German or Italian in ancestry. He was a laborer who worked for a wage in a factory or workshop. He was an inhabitant of a large northern metropolis, possibly steeped in old-world radical tradition, and probably ambivalent about patriotism, if not outright hostile.

    When the recovery finally began in ’98, it was the first group that found itself rescued from perdition. As independent producers, the market decided their renumeration. When the gold flowed, so did the wheat and the corn, and they prospered.

    Such was not necessarily the case for the industrial laborers. Though a thriving market and rising profits ought to have meant rising wages, this was not true as a general rule. The passing of the Red Act enabled proprietors to label most any strike or dissent as insurrection and call for militia or troops to put it down. As such, they were hardly compelled to boost their workers’ pay, and indeed, now had an excellent incentive and opportunity to slash them. Real wages fell by 2% across the United States (but disproportionately in the Industrial Belt) between 1896 and 1899.

    When economic conditions improved, the SLP’s base didn’t abandon it as did that of the Populists, because, for many of them, times had not improved. At least, not noticeably. In fact, many workers reached their peak of discontentment between ’96 and ’98, and the ranks of the Socialists actually swelled.

    It has also been questioned why the anti-war stance of the Populists damaged them at the ballot box, while the if anything more uncompromising pacifism of the Socialists did not seem to have the same effect.

    There certainly was no shortage of newspaper editorials or rival congressman denouncing the SLP and its adherents as unamerican reds, or the favorite; ‘aliens’. But the SLP’s relatively fringe status worked in its favor. The Populists received the brunt of hawkish attacks because, while the Republicans and conservative Democrats certainly viewed the ascendance of the Socialists as a worrying trend, they still saw their great enemy in the Populists, who seemed the more immediate and the more powerful menace. Thus, the Socialists dodged much of the odium and condemnation they made have otherwise received.

    Additionally, the largely first- and second-generation immigrant composition of the SLP’s voter base (at this point possibly still more than 50% of the party) meant that many were simply not as fervently attached by emotion to the glories and triumphs of the US Military. This is not to give credence to the old canard that migrants were by nature subversive or hateful of their new country, but many were not so keyed in to the patriotic cultural rituals and customs of the United States, meaning they simply did not exhibit the knee-jerk nationalism triggered in many by was widely viewed as a just war.

    All this was much clearer in retrospect.

    Anyway, the status of antiwar activists was not raised when the optimists were proven correct, as America triumphed over Spain in a matter of weeks.

    The nation went to the polls in 1898 generally good spirits, still flush from the victory and the subsequent cession of Cuba, Guam, and the Philippines.

    However, the affair did not proceed without some trouble. In certain towns, especially in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and the western mining states, private guards were hired by local party bosses to ‘stand watch’ over the ballot boxes for the purposes of ensuring ‘orderly’ voting. The true motivation—to prevent Socialist victories in districts that seemed favorably disposed—was painfully transparent to most. In Denver, a number of miners were turned away from the polling station on the dubious grounds that they had ‘already voted’. When the miners protested, a scuffle broke out, and one man died of a gunshot wound.

    On the flipside, in the increasingly militant regions of western Pennsylvania and the Appalachians, reports came of men pressured into voting SLP by their radical coworkers. “They called me ‘blackleg’,” a molder who had staunchly refused to join the STLA-affiliated steelworkers’ union recalled. “And told me I would vote the red ticket, or they would split my skull.’

    When the results came in, the first takeaway was that the Populists had been somewhat disappointed. They in fact gained in the House, it was just not as large a gain as they’d hoped. They rose to 70 seats, adding another nine to those they’d held in 1896. In fact, they actually lost three seats to the Socialists and one to the Republicans in the north but made them up in other quarters thanks to the collapsing Democrats.

    The Democrats fell ever further, dropping to 29 representatives, and losing nine of those they’d held in ’96.

    The Republicans lost, but still managed to cling to their majority. They gave up 28 seats but gained two, one Democrat and one Populist, bringing their grand majority down from 215 to 189.

    But it was the Socialists that emerged from the election as the great winners. The other eight Democratic seats were theirs, along with the three they’d snatched from the Populists. Having lost no representatives, they also stripped away 17 Republican seats, doubling their number and raising it to 34.

    So, as it stood following the elections of 1898, the House of Representatives seated 198 Republicans, 29 Democrats, 70 Populists, 34 socialists, and 24 independents and others.

    The Socialists were now, to the horror of the established parties, a larger party than the Democrats in the House. Granted, it was not by much, since the Populists, Socialists, and Democrats all hovered much nearer to each another than any did to the GOP—but the very idea of it was sobering.

    The papers predictably carried headlines such as the New York Herald’s ‘REDS ADVANCE IN CONGRESS’.

    As for the Populists, they lost two of their senators. One went to the Democrats, one went to the Republican.

    The Populists did not yet realize it, but their meteoric rise had already begun to sputter out.

    Bryan wrote in his journal simply, ‘hopeful but not smashing’.

    Some Populists, such as Henry Demarest Lloyd (who would himself in due time join the SLP), privately believed that the ranks of the party would swell once more should the next inevitable economic crisis come.

    But the damage was done. Though the Populists would continue to contest elections as long as they were held, their influence declined slowly, and they would never again gain the peak they reached in ’94-’96.
     
    Last edited:
    Further Advances and the Ascendancy of Henry Frick
  • Excerpt from Blood and Steel: The Rise and Fall of Henry C. Frick, by Philip Dray (Montevideo University publishing, 2003)


    In December of 1897, three months after the Lattimer Massacre, Governor Frick printed the first 1,000 copies of the Voice of the Nation. The paper initially circulated only in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and a few other major Pennsylvanian towns, but it soon found willing presses in New York, Illinois, the upper south, and even further afield.

    It was an instant success. Ostensibly it was only another of the many weekly newssheets that were so popular among the American public. But, like most newssheets, it had a certain slant. Frick’s slant was one that resonated widely in the jittery, paranoid atmosphere fostered by the Red Summer, the seemingly untrammeled march of the Socialists in congress, the Lattimer catastrophe, and a number of smaller-scale strike actions and work stoppages that rippled across the country in ’96-’99.

    The Voice was viciously anti-radical and anti-socialist. Frick himself and his editors might have disputed the charge ‘anti-labor’, but not many others would have.

    The very first issue, a retrospective on the events of ’94, featuring assembled eyewitness accounts from the three insurrectionary cities, denounced the strikers as a ‘plundering horde’ and ‘creeping rabble under the red flag’.

    An editorial of 1898, concerning the speech of Socialist representative Victor Berger in congress, called him a ‘dissipated, ranting Dutchman without a country,’ and went on later to assert coolly that, ‘the only cure for such absurd, poisonous doctrines is a heavy dose of lead.’

    The masthead of the Voice thundered, ‘Countrymen awake!’

    And to many who wrote in to the paper, it did seem like the Voice, and its readers, were the only ones awake.

    Frick gladly printed them, so long as they were in step with the paper’s narrative.

    ‘How can the scatterbrained gentlemen in congress,’ complained one letter, from the twenty-four-year-old daughter of a New York silk merchant. ‘Continue blathering about trade and metals and scuffles with Spain when we stand on the brink of anarchy? A republic helmed by such ‘statesmen’ very nearly deserves oblivion!’

    The Voice, whose columns were often written by Frick himself, and by a number of regular guest writers, tepidly supported the war effort against Spain in ’98. But even at the height of the fighting, the paper concerned itself primarily with the supposed socialistic threat lurking at home.

    By 1899, the paper had achieved a national circulation of about 250,000 copies a week, making it one of the most popular publications in the country. If Homestead had briefly brought Frick to the country’s attention seven years earlier, the Voice of the Nation finally kept him there.

    Frick was undeterred by those who mocked him for ‘playing newsman’ while he was supposed to be governing the state of Pennsylvania. Indeed, it did not seem to interfere with his duties. His tenure was not particularly eventful, save for the Lattimer Affair. In late 1897, he established two new public libraries, one in Pittsburgh and one in Philadelphia. Many whispered it was yet another petty swipe at his nemesis and erstwhile friend, Carnegie, whose philanthropy was legendary. In mid-1898 Carnegie Steel, of which he was still majority shareholder, was renamed U.S Steel. Later that year, he held a parade for the returning Pennsylvanian soldiers who’d taken part in the Cuban campaign. Despite his reputation for avarice, during his time as Pennsylvania’s governor he never attempted to award himself or his friends government contracts—despite accusations to the contrary—though he had ample opportunity to do so.

    However, failure to chase gold did not mean he was above blatant corruption and politicking. In the fall of 1898, when seven socialist aldermen (constituting a majority) were elected to the city council of increasingly red Pittsburgh, an annoyed Frick worked with the city’s Mayor Ford to have the results overturned, and five of the seven stripped of their new posts.

    The outraged Socialists of Pennsylvania naturally protested, and the incident soon ballooned into a national scandal. Frick charged that the Socialist victory was undue, and that they had stuffed ballot boxes. The Socialists of course, denied any such thing, and accused Frick of blatantly contravening the will of the people.

    The Voice brought Frick’s side of the story to readers nationwide, while the more meager media apparatus of the SLP tried to do the same for its own narrative.

    Eventually, a congressional committee was formed to investigate the matter—unsurprisingly in the Republican dominated House, it found in favor of Frick and Ford.

    Henry Frick had once again stepped onto the national stage in the role of the man who could—and would—stand up to the Reds on their own turf and drive them back.

    A diverse a set of voices ranging from ex-governor Theodore Roosevelt of New York and ex-president Cleveland expressed their approval of the outcome.

    But by DeLeon’s angry ranting in congress, Frick was ‘the chief enemy of laboring people—reaction incarnate, soaked in the workers’ blood.’

    Plenty in the street agreed.

    On 1 March 1899, the offices of the Voice were bombed, killing a secretary and two pedestrians who’d had the misfortune to be passing by at the moment.

    Though the Pennsylvania SLP disavowed the action, and the national SLP did as well, it did not keep the target off of their backs. De Leon did not at all help matters when he stood up in congress and declared that though the bombing was ‘regrettable, Mr. Frick has sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind’. A chorus of boos and hisses escorted the blunt Marxist back to his seat.

    The bombing created an outpouring of sympathy across the nation and another anti-socialist backlash. Five foreign-born workers (three Hungarians, an Italian, and a Polish Jew), two of whom had actually participated in the Homestead strike years earlier, were ultimately arrested for the crime. Though the general historical consensus is that at least some of them were involved, all were finally released when damning evidence proved elusive. Nevertheless, two of the Hungarians were shot to death outside of a Pittsburgh bar weeks later by unknown assailants.

    Frick’s overthrow of the socialist Pittsburgh government seemed retroactively vindicated.

    As soon as the Voice came back on line, its first headline read, ‘UNDAUNTED: NO CONCESSION TO RED TERROR’.

    Accusations that Frick orchestrated the attack himself have little foundation, but it certainly did not hurt him in the long term.

    “I am glad they hate me so,” he boasted in an interview with the New York Times. “A man does well to be hated by howling scoundrels such as these.”

    The SLP of Pennsylvania, which had by 1899 captured the electorates of multiple counties in the state’s coal and steel regions, including Homestead’s Allegeheny County, came in for another round of persecution.

    The party’s rolls in the state now counted nearly 30,000 members, not counting the many officially unaffiliated sympathizers. This explosive growth could be traced to the particular brutality typically on display in Pennsylvania labor disputes. From the days of the Molly Maguires to Homestead to Lattimer, too much blood had been spilled. With the coming of the Red Act, unionization was almost impossible. Wages had fallen nearly 5% across Pennsylvania since 1897. Now that there was a party pledged to do something about it, many couldn’t sign on fast enough. Of course, an SLP membership was enough to cost a man his job at most any firm, so there were scores more who voted the ticket but kept quiet about it.

    Frick was eager to do something about this spreading affliction, and now he had a good excuse. When the state leadership of the SLP tried to organize a May Day parade through Pittsburgh, Mayor Ford, again with Frick’s connivance, refused to grant the permit. A further several applications were similarly turned down.

    The party, under the leadership of James H. Maurer, recognized the precarious position they maintained in the wake of the Voice bombing and backed down. But many of the more radical rank and file did not.

    On 1 May 1899, some 400 workers and a number of socialist students from the University of Pennsylvania (a fraction of what would have assembled with the party’s official blessing) gathered in Market Square, waving red flags alongside the Stars and Stripes and singing ‘the Internationale’ and ‘the Star-Spangled Banner’ alike.

    As moody crowds glowered at them, they attempted to sally out of the square and begin their march down Forbes Avenue.

    Mayor Ford, deeply frustrated by the defiance, dispatched a contingent of police to put an end to the nonsense. The officers ordered the marchers to disperse and informed them they were unlawfully assembled.

    The majority of the demonstrators went home. But a convinced core of some 100 remained. When again ordered to depart, they did not obey. The police formed a rough cordon around the Square. They attempted to arrest a number of men they had pegged as ‘ringleaders’.

    Someone threw a stone. The marchers launched into a brawl with the forces of order. Amazingly, not a single firearm seems to have been discharged, and no one was killed. But thirty people were injured, and fifty arrested.

    Ford, furious, had police raid the Pittsburgh SLP headquarters and Maurer, along with his comrades, arrested, despite their protests that the marchers had acted on their own initiative. Frick was fully supportive of Ford’s actions, hoping to bring Maurer and the rest up on charges of conspiracy and public disorder (and maybe indicting them under the Red Act, too), which with some luck might net them a few years in prison and smash the nucleus of the SLP in Pennsylvania.

    Maurer along with six of his colleagues were indicted on just those charges on May 23rd to much outrage and celebration.

    (Those actually arrested at the march on the other hand were, save for about ten ‘core radicals’, quietly released.)

    The trial soon became a national cause célébre on both fronts, anti-socialist and pro-socialist alike. The Voice’s circulation soared ever higher. But so too did the publications of DeLeon’s Daily People, now the official mouthpiece of the SLP.

    The trial of Maurer was seen as a sort of test case against American radicalism. It had already been dealt a heavy blow on the organizational ground-level with the Fourth Force Act, and it was hoped the conviction of Maurer would similarly cripple its more respectable, legal-political wing.

    Maurer’s defense successfully proved the SLP as a legal political party had had no part in the organization of the assembly at Pittsburgh and had in fact actively discouraged it. The prosecution thus took a step back and insisted instead on the ‘moral culpability’ of the Socialist leadership in the disturbance.

    The trial filled the country’s newspapers for weeks, stretching into early June, when it was overwhelmed by the news from Cripple Creek. After two demonstrations in support of the accused in Chicago and New York respectively ended in cracked heads and dozens of arrests, even President McKinley himself could not ignore it. He certainly was not well-disposed towards socialism but having familiarized himself with the minutiae of the case, was convinced the men were innocent of any crime, and moreover that Frick had rather blatantly manipulated the whole situation to raise his own star in the eyes of the country. Mark Hanna, the Ohio senator and Republican kingmaker who’d helped bring McKinley to office, encouraged him to intervene before things got any further out of hand.

    Sometime in early July, McKinley personally telephoned Frick and recommended he pardon Maurer and the rest. Frick curtly denied the request, much to McKinley’s chagrin.

    The trial was going poorly for Maurer and his comrades, and a conviction seemed increasingly likely. Then the socialists found themselves rescued by the unlikeliest of allies.

    Andrew Carnegie was, of course, no more a socialist than Frick or McKinley. But he had always at least tried to present himself as understanding of labor, even when he did not always do so very well. Frick’s ‘persona’ had always been that of the iron-fisted industrial monarch; Carnegie’s had always been that of the jovial, philanthropic Santa Claus.

    When Carnegie was asked why he was furnishing ‘reds’ with legal counsel and public support, he responded that “in this great land, men have the right to speak, think, and do as they please, so long as in the act they harm no other men. And waving flags in the square, red as they might be, hurts no one. Not even Mr. Frick.”

    But driven as Carnegie might have been by genuine sentiment, or by the desire to maintain his image of the kindly rich man, his overriding motivation was no doubt revenge against his old partner and friend. He did not—and never would—forgive Frick for swindling him out of his own company, and if he had to bankroll socialists to undercut him, then so be it.

    If there was any man in Pennsylvania who was still more than a match for Governor Frick in terms of wealth and power, it was Andrew Carnegie. Defended by the finest lawyers that money could buy, and the beneficiaries of a fervent propaganda campaign carried out through every paper that would publish, Maurer and his friends were soon set at liberty.

    Frick was furious. His rage did not abate when McKinley publicly expressed his approval at the case’s outcome.

    In private governor opined on McKinley and Carnegie, snapping that “the two dogs ought to be strung up from the same goddamned tree.”

    He did not temper his fury until his old friend Andrew Mellon came along, with a rather fresh perspective of the whole debacle. It could, Mellon insisted, be turned into a victory. Frick was popular. Despised as he might be by radicals, organized labor in Pennsylvania and beyond, and sentimental intellectuals everywhere, he had in the past two years amassed a broad stratum of supporters among the agitated middle-classes and his fellow industrial titans. And he had built up that base by his incessant attacks on the red menace. Now the president himself was cheering the release of a few Socialist firebrands—it was clear Frick was the only man in the country with any sense left.

    So that was exactly the line he took. In his first issue of the Voice published after the acquittal of the Socialists, Frick stated that he ‘could not understand why Mr. McKinley would celebrate the turning loose into society of men determined to uproot its very foundations and plunge the whole country into anarchy, and who would very much like to see his own refined head on a pike.’

    It was the first time he had ever published anything like an attack on McKinley, still a popular and well-regarded president in the wake of the slowly recovering economy and the victory over Spain. It shocked many Republicans, who came to see Frick as a freewheeling rabble-rouser interested only in self-aggrandizement. But it caught the ears of many others. Ever since the Red Summer, and intensifying with every labor disturbance since, the current of those who demanded something be done about the snowballing danger of radical subversion grew ever stronger. And to these individuals, McKinley and his administration came across as frustratingly unconcerned. Blind, even. And Frick, at least, was speaking sense.

    Though this break from party orthodoxy is significant, and a solid piece of evidence that Frick’s ambitions were not near satisfied, it is not known if he had at this point decided upon—or was even considering—a presidential run.

    Then came Cripple Creek.
     
    Last edited:
    Socialists in the South
  • Excerpt from Black and Red: Socialists and the Race Question In the Late United States (Imperial University Publishing. Brisbane, 1963)

    Daniel DeLeon, leader of the Socialist Labor Party, was a difficult individual. He was often blasted by ostensible allies for his inflexibility and the bullheaded dogmatism that drove many away from the SLP.

    He was consistently scornful of electoral politics, insistent that the ballot box held nothing at all for the worker, and that reforms were hardly worth fighting for, even so long as the revolution failed to come. DeLeon essentially had to be wrangled into running for the congressional seat he eventually won. Once he did so, he found he actually enjoyed the opportunity to hurl Marxist invective at flabbergasted Republicans and Democrats. But on most other issues he remained as unmoved as ever.

    Race, in particular, held little interest for DeLeon and he refused to discover any interest in it. For him, class was class, and all else was nothing. Besides his stubborn nature, his foreign birth and upbringing made it difficult for him to understand the extreme salience of race in American daily life.

    He frequently claimed that the friction between whites and blacks was “in no way attributable to their color” and was instead purely a function of class. He failed to see the unique status of American blacks in the life of the nation.

    This being the case, it surprised many that the SLP received an unusually high share of the vote from a number of southern cities during the ’94 midterms. New Orleans was still under martial law and thus barred from voting. But in Atlanta, Baton Rouge, and Wilmington, the Socialist ticket won a surprising 15%+ of the electorate. Considering the demographics of these cities, this would have been impossible without the black vote.

    All three cities had seen sympathetic strikes that summer, and there had been some violence in Atlanta especially. So, the blacks who voted SLP probably did do so as a function of class rather than race. Nevertheless, the result was an alarm for the Socialists, who until now had focused almost entirely on organization in the industrial belt and to a lesser extent the mining west. Many were not even aware their party had been on the ballot in any southern states.

    Now it was clear a potential constituency existed in the south, and that constituency consisted at least in part of black Americans.

    DeLeon was all for organizing in the south but was opposed to any organization ‘on the basis of race’.

    Many of the SLP organizers who took their first tentative steps over the Potomac were inclined to agree. In late 1895, a branch of the party was opened in New Orleans. Its headquarters were shortly targeted by arsonists. City firemen took their time in fighting the blaze, and by the time they even bothered to direct their hoses in the proper direction, it had been reduced to ash. A young Pennsylvania Socialist who’d traveled to Mississippi in the hopes of organizing sharecroppers, white and black, was dragged from his bed in the night by masked men, stripped naked, beaten, and ordered to leave town by morning or die. The newly established SLP offices in Montgomery began receiving letters in their first week of operation threatening physical harm and death should they not ‘make themselves scarce’ immediately.

    All this was without loudly advocating racial egalitarianism. Many Socialists perhaps understandably believed DeLeon right, and that pushing for any policies along racial lines was a surefire way to bring down even worse wrath upon their heads.

    This began to change with the arrival, or rather, the return, of Peter H. Clark.

    In 1896, Clark was already sixty-seven, a lifelong abolitionist and later labor activist. In the 1870s, he had joined the SLP (then called the Workingmen’s Party) but left within a few years after he was convinced the party had little concern for the welfare of blacks.

    Now, in the wake of the Red Summer, with the specter of disenfranchisement looming over the south (Mississippi had recently implemented a new constitution effectively stripping blacks and many poor whites of the vote), and the reality that the SLP was making efforts, if halting and tentative ones, to reach out to black voters, he returned.

    Clark insisted that “if the negro can be convinced that socialism is his best, and indeed his only, hope for emancipation, he will be the best and most loyal socialist on the face of the earth.”

    DeLeon was skeptical, but many in the party, especially its newer and younger members, were less so. This faction, led by Emil Seidel, finally prevailed upon DeLeon to at least allow Clark a permanent column in People, the SLP mouthpiece, devoted to ‘colored issues’. DeLeon stormily agreed. As the party’s ranks swelled, his personal idiosyncrasies counted for less and less.

    One of his very first editorials was simply titled ‘the Negro and Socialism’. Roughly paraphrasing Sieyés, Clark asked, rhetorically; ‘What is the negro? Nothing. What does the negro wish to be? Something. What will socialism give him? Everything’.

    It was a great promise, but the SLP’s prospects in the south did not look much improved. Despite the respectable vote share they had received in some quarters, it seemed few native southerners, white or black, were clamoring to join up, whether out of apathy, antipathy, or fear. Organizers were still being harassed, run out of town, and in a few particularly grim examples, lynched.

    By the close of 1896, the executive committee was considering cutting its losses in the old Confederacy.

    It was the Populists that came to the rescue. In the wake of ’94, the Populists were in a powerful position through the south. In some states, particularly Georgia and North Carolina, they had all but completely swept the vote of the poor farmers and workers from the Democrats. In others, such as Mississippi and Florida, they were making serious inroads.

    Initially, the Populists had been indifferent and even hostile to the SLP. Bryan, by now the party’s undisputed leader, distrusted DeLeon and his bunch, foreign and ‘godless’ as they were (though the American socialists were rarely as anti-religious as their European counterparts). But the Populist Party was having a hard fight in the south. The Democrats might be fading, but they were not fading gently. They clawed and fought for every voter. Populist offices were ransacked same as SLP offices. Known Populist voters and organizers were harassed and on occasion killed. Bryan decided they needed all the allies they could get.

    The coalition began at the local level. Only a month before the elections of 1896, the respective leaderships of the SLP and Populist Party in Athens, Georgia, concluded an agreement by which they would run a joint ticket. It was more a hollow display of strength than anything—when one saw two parties joined together, hopefully they would not notice one of those two parties had next to zero members.

    More important to the Socialists than electoral gains were the physical protections afforded by the alliance.

    Only a few weeks later, an armed band organized by the Athens Democrats made for the SLP headquarters, with the intention of burning it down or stampeding its occupants out, with the justification that the Socialists were pushing ‘nigger rule’. When they arrived, they found the building guarded by a hastily formed but heavily armed militia courtesy of the Populists, who commanded strong support from farmers in the region. Not having anticipated resistance, the vigilantes retreated.

    Similar stories came out of dozens of towns and cities through the south.

    Finally, the SLP had some leeway, though not much, to organize.

    The party attempted to strike a fragile balance between appeal to black workers and farmers, and appeal to their white counterparts. No socialist editor or speaker south of Washington would dream of calling for social equality, or, God forbid, integration. Rather, in the southern editions of Daily People, and on election posters, there were promises to ‘give the Negro a fair deal’, or ‘right the wrongs done to the colored race’. One could read into the slogans promises as modest or lofty as he liked. And those whites that would be scared off by such meek proposals would never have voted Socialist to begin with.

    The SLP thus went on to score some appreciable victories in Dixie. In 1896, they managed to elect two legislators to the Louisiana state congress. That same year, they elected three representatives from Georgia on a Populist-Socialist ticket. In 1897, the Socialists managed to hold a rally in New Orleans attended by more than 2,000. Naturally, it devolved into a brawl, but no one was killed, so it was counted as a triumph.

    The great turning point did not come until Wilmington.

    In 1896, North Carolina had brought to a power a ‘Fusionist’ coalition of Republican and Populist candidates, including Republican Daniel J. Russell as governor. The Fusionists also held an overwhelming majority in the state legislature in the wake of the elections. The victory was powered both by the support of the state’s large black minority, and also an increasing number of poor and laboring whites defecting from a Democratic Party they saw as ever more the tool of the moneyed ‘Bourbon’ elites.

    One of the Republican governor’s first acts in office was to sign an act reducing property qualifications for suffrage, endearing him and the Fusionists to the poor, black and white.

    The outcome was horrifying for North Carolina’s white supremacists. The terrible days of Reconstruction seemed at hand again. Anarchy, race war, and worst of all, race amalgamation loomed.

    As 1898 approached, the Democrats were convinced they had to turn out the Fusionists as soon as possible or risk tumbling into dreaded ‘negro rule’. This impulse was especially powerful in the black majority Wilmington. Wilmington was the largest city in North Carolina, a bustling port city surrounded by the pine flats whose sap and timber fed the state’s economic life.

    The Fusionist mayor Silas Wright had staffed the civil services with other Fusionists, including a number of blacks. The sight of African postmen and, aldermen, and worse of all, policemen, was too much for many of the local whites.

    The Democrats launched a statewide campaign against Russell and the ‘vicious negroes’, that he was foisting onto the good people of North Carolina. The rabid Ben ‘Pitchfork’ Tillman of South Carolina—who had openly bragged of overturning electoral results by way of fraud and slaying negro voters in the days of Reconstruction—upbraided his neighbors to the north for their temerity in allowing themselves to be ‘ruled by niggers’.

    But Wilmington, with its large and relatively organized community of blacks, was especially important. Early in 1898, editor of the Raleigh News and Observor Josephus Daniels met with state Democratic Party chairman Furnifold Simmons in New Bern to discuss the upcoming election. They agreed that, besides the vigorous press campaign Daniels and his allies would wage on behalf of the Democrats, force might very well be necessary to prevent the black vote from deciding in favor of the fusionists yet again.

    In Wilmington, the core of any paramilitary units assembled to terrorize blacks would undoubtedly be drawn from the largely Irish white working-class districts of the city, historically a loyal Democratic constituency.

    But history was marching on.

    In 1894, Wilmington’s workers had joined in the nation-wide general strike that had ended in such sorrow. This included the Irish brakemen, bricklayers, and stevedores. A clash had ensued with state militia, leaving twenty dead. It was no New Orleans or Chicago, but it was bloody. And it was not forgotten.

    A significant number of North Carolina’s whites had voted for the fusionists, including those in Wilmington. This certainly did not mean they had suddenly become proponents of racial equality, by any means. But this change of allegiances worried leading Democrats nonetheless—it was a foreboding crack in the hitherto rock-solid popular foundation of Democratic-white supremacist dominance.

    A chapter of the SLP had existed in Wilmington since ‘95, and it had made some inroads with the working-class whites and blacks alike through their appeals to the spirit of ’94 and denunciations of Democrat ‘treason’ against the working class. Not to the extent of the Populists, but they had a firm, if quite small constituency.

    Across the state, Fusionists were well aware the coming election would not be a fair and free one if the Democrats could help it. Already, men like Daniels and Simmons, not to mention the old white supremacist stalwart and ex-Confederate officer Alfred Waddell, were raising paramilitary units of ‘red shirts’, which would patrol on election day and keep blacks from the ballot boxes by any means necessary.

    In Wilmington the redshirts were especially prominent. Many were not even North Carolinians—they had come from South Carolina or even further south to prevent negro rule in a southern sister state. A few weeks ahead of the election, they paraded 1,000 strong through the city, intentionally planning their route to include predominantly black neighborhoods in a show of intimidation. They passed, singing and shouting, pistols rattling at their hips, with a very clear message for any black man who might entertain the idea of voting.

    But something had changed. When they moved on, and marched through white districts, their reception was not quite what they had expected. There were certainly cheers, probably more cheers than hisses—but there were hisses.

    It is quite important to emphasize that this implies no developing racial concord in Wilmington or North Carolina. When the redshirts were catcalled by whites, it was not because they were white supremacists, but because they were Democrats, and there was a developing contempt towards the Democratic party among many southern whites.

    The Fusionists hardly cared about motivations. They would need all the support they could get.

    In late October, the chair of the SLP in Wilmington, in fact a female New Yorker named Ella Bloo, came to Republican Mayor Wright and offered the party’s meager resources in the coming campaign. A bit befuddled but in no position to turn her down, he agreed.

    So it was that a triple alliance of Socialists-Republicans-Populists emerged in North Carolina. It was certainly a strange marriage, not one that would last, and not one that could have ever come into being outside of such a specific time and place. But it did exist, and it would contest the elections of 1898.

    The fusionists (which in North Carolina now included the SLP) launched a propaganda campaign to counter that of the democrats.

    The theme was not, of course, the defense of colored suffrage. That would have been a non-starter. Rather, they drew as much attention as possible to the fact that the Bourbon Democrats would just as soon disenfranchise working whites as negroes, and that in fact such provisions would be included in the state constitution many prominent Democrats proposed to implement should they win the elections. The Democrats were accused of using the bogey of ‘negro rule’ as a treacherous mask for their true intentions of taking the vote from honest, working white men.

    “We couldn’t say to white men, you must get out and defend the nigger vote,” A black socialist who worked on the campaign in Wilmington at the time would later recall. “We would not have got a single man out of his house with that. We had to say—and it was true—you have to defend your right to vote, and if the black man’s right to vote is defended as a consequence, well, so be it.”

    Regardless, the message was an effective one in Wilmington, with its working class still smarting from the suppression of ’94. The Fusionists, with the support of Mayor Wright and Chief of Police John Melton, organized their own militias to counter the redshirts. Needing a symbol of their own, the armed supporters of the Fusionists were soon parading through Wilmington wearing green armbands, the color of the Populists.

    In a strange twist of fate, the militants of the Democrats and of the fusionists were both largely drawn from ethnic Irish workers. Sometimes even from the same family.

    “I saw two Irishmen,” Chief Melton would later recall. “A redshirt and a Fusionist, both carrying pistols, confront each other on a street corner. The red shirt asked his fellow ‘how can you carry arms so that the nigger can rule over you?’ To which the fellow replied, ‘you are the one who wants to be nothing but a nigger for the rich man’. Amazingly, neither shot the other down where he stood, nor did they even come to blows. But they turned and walked away.”

    An Irish railway worker, in an appeal to his fellows, said that “the Democrat like Mr. Waddell or Mr. Daniels is not your friend. He will call you a white man and a brother so that you will cast your vote for him, and then when your back is turned, he will laugh that he got one over on that filthy Hibernian ape.”

    The Socialists, though small (they had registered less than 250 votes out of Wilmington’s 5,000 or so eligible in the ’96 elections, and the party rolls included only three dozen people) were second to none in organization. It was them that produced the famous cartoon depicting a white worker running himself through with a saber to get at the black man behind him, while a portly Democrat in suit and top hat watches from afar, rubbing his hands with glee. The sword reads ‘Democratic government’, and the caption reads ‘the white man’s ticket, or the rich man’s ticket?’. Another cartoon depicts a similarly caricatured capitalist standing upon the corpse of a slain laborer (identified as ‘the workers of ’94’) and extending a blood-drenched hand of friendship towards a living worker, who he calls ‘my Anglo-Saxon brother!’.

    But tensions did not explode until election day themselves.

    When the day did come, violence erupted almost immediately, as a young white socialist bricklayer named Michael Cronly went to cast his vote. The trio of redshirts stationed at the ballot box, in fact working comrades of Cronly’s who knew his sympathies, threatened, ‘boy, you had best be voting the white man’s party’. Cronly responded, ‘I am going to vote Fusionist and by God if any of you try to stop me, I will shoot you dead’. He attempted to force his way past them but was thrown back. Cronly did not draw the revolver he had tucked into his belt. Instead, he returned with six other armed fusionist militants, who compelled the three redshirts at gunpoint to surrender their own arms, then beat them bloody and stuffed the ballot box full of Fusionist votes. They remained on guard the rest of the day, allowing blacks and Populists or Republicans in but turning away all men they knew or suspected would vote Democrat.

    In the town of Maxton, redshirts smashed ballot boxes, stuffed others, and ran off blacks with rifles. In Hamlet, a clash between redshirts and fusionists resulted in five dead men and a burnt polling station.

    The entire state of North Carolina, but especially Wilmington, seemed a war zone. Men kept their ears open for gunfire as they filled out ballots. They stood guard at their doors with rifles, waiting for either redshirt terror or a phantom black uprising that Daniels had threatened in his papers.

    The Fusionist militias in Wilmington and the outlying areas were largely the product of socialist organization. Bloor herself worked out their division into ‘companies’ of twenty men, each led by captains, an organization Chief Melton simply signed off on. Most of the men in these forces were not themselves Socialists (though some were), but simply Republicans, or, more likely, Populists.

    The classic 1958 film, the Battle of Wilmington famously portrays a mixed-race militia defending a ballot box from redshirts in the employ of the story’s villain, a wealthy planter. It is stirring fiction, but it is indeed fiction. While both black and white men served in Fusionist militias, almost without exception the individual units were monoracial. Blacks and whites might be willing to acknowledge, grudgingly, that they shared an interest, but that did not mean they wanted to carry arms beside one another.

    Nevertheless, the sight of Irish stevedores or rough-faced white farmers escorting blacks to vote struck many as surreal. The Wilmington Messenger denounced them as ‘race traitors’, but they certainly did not see themselves as such. As far as they were concerned, they were white men, working in the interests of white men, and if blacks had to vote to advance that interest, then so be it.

    One young black voter recalled being guarded at the polls by a crew of “cruel-looking white timbermen with pistols.” He went on; “as we approached, one of them waved his Colt revolver before my face and said, ‘we are taking you to vote, and you will vote the fusionist ticket’. It was a silly threat. No black man from Galveston to Richmond would vote Democrat. I suppose he just wanted me to know that even if we were for the moment in league, he was still a white man and I was still a black man.”

    Daniels’ News and Observer crowed that the Democrats would ‘sweep the states’ as North Carolinians had ‘grown tired of negroism’.

    Fusionist papers seemed equally confident of victory.

    The true vote totals will likely never be known. The widespread voter intimidation, violence, and outright fraud perpetrated on both sides that 8 November makes it impossible.

    Nevertheless, as it was reported in North Carolina’s papers the following day, the Fusionists had not only maintained their two-thirds majority in the state legislature, they had expanded it, compressing the Democrats to less than a fourth of total representatives.

    The Democrats, of course, were horrified. The News and Observer lamented that ‘negroism, communism, and anarchy have won the day’, rather overstating the presence of the Socialists among the ranks of the Fusionists. But in most of the state, the results of the election were accepted with a quiet, simmering resignation.

    Not so in Wilmington.

    10 November 1898, two days after the election and a day after the outcome had become clear, Colonel Waddell, prominent attorney and organizer of white supremacist paramilitaries George Rountree, and the former Democratic mayor Silas Fishblate called a meeting of Wilmington’s ‘white men’ in the county courthouse, to ‘discuss the furtherance of white supremacy’.

    It was clear to all who saw the appeal printed in the Wilmington Messenger that the ‘discussion’ would consist of organization for the overthrow of the city government.

    Panicked, Chief Melton issued orders for the Fusionist divisions remaining from election day not to disband, and for those that had already disbanded to reconstitute. Mayor Wright barricaded himself at Thalian Hall (which served as theater and city hall), and Fusionist militiamen shortly arrived to provide security. They sealed up the entrances and established a perimeter around the building, and finally a number of the men sporting green armbands took up positions on the rooftop or in top floor windows, so that they could sweep the streets with rifles.

    Meanwhile, Democrats and redshirts flooded into the courthouse in answer to Waddell’s summons. Sure enough, Waddell and Rountree harangued the crowd, announcing that the election was ‘illegitimate’ and represented the triumph of ‘black and red anarchy’ over ‘good government’. As such, Waddell insisted the white men of Wilmington had no choice but to take up arms. Of course, many of the redshirts in his audience were already carrying arms and raised their Winchesters and revolvers into the air in assent to the colonel’s plea.

    By noon, an army of nearly 2,000 redshirts and other armed Democratic whites were marching on city hall, with the intent of forcing the resignation of Wright, Melton, and the rest of the Fusionist officials. And if they would not go peacefully—well, that was why the men carried rifles.

    The mob paraded through Wilmington’s streets, shouting ‘out with the niggers!’ and ‘this is a white man’s government!’

    Melton had consciously divided his Fusionist militants by race. He placed white militiamen in city hall and the immediately adjacent streets and spread black units further along the approaches to city hall, so that they would be the first to meet the approaching redshirts.

    All of Wilmington not already out and armed on one side or another huddled down behind locked doors and prayed for the best.

    Two blocks from Thalian Hall, the redshirt column encountered its first resistance. It was a thin line of black fusionist militiamen, spread across the road, rifles on their shoulders. A redshirt captain called Dowling ordered them to step aside. They did not.

    In the weeks leading up to the election, both Democrats and Fusionists had purchased hundreds of Winchesters, Colts, and other weapons for use by their respective partisans. Wilmington was perhaps the best-armed town in the country. And now they would be put to use.

    The redshirts raised rifles, and again demanded that the blacks make way. They refused and insisted “we are defending the true government”.

    Someone opened fire. Bullets whirred along the old streets and sparked off brick and mortar. Men fell, shot through the throats or guts. Blood slicked the cobblestones. Acrid smoke hung in the air.

    By the time the first bout of shooting was through, the redshirts had killed or scattered all of their opponents and continued their march on to Thalian Hall.

    They defiladed before the building. In the windows and on the building’s classical Greek porticos, they could see their similarly equipped counterparts glowering down at them. Many of the men on opposite sides of the lines knew each other. They worked together or were even family.

    But it had come down to one question—as the Fusionists saw it, did they care more for the suppression of the negro vote, or the protection of their own?

    Waddell told his redshirts not to “squeeze your trigger unless you must—there ought to be no more blood, excepting that these scoundrels will not come out peacefully.”

    The redshirts called out to the Fusionist officials and militiamen barricaded inside, “come out, come out, or by God we’ll turn you out!”

    The redshirts, who had already slain some half a dozen black militiamen on the approach, were ready for further action. The blood of the Fusionists was likewise up.

    The Battle of Wilmington was about to commence.
     
    Last edited:
    The Battle of Wilmington

  • Wilmington, North Carolina

    November 1898

    Bill Robbins squinted up at the sun from beneath the drooping, broad-brimmed hat. The weight of the Winchester in his arms grew wearisome. He took some courage from the mass of men crowded along either side of him, all resplendent in their freshly sewn red coats and overshirts. Just like his.

    Truth was, he did not especially want to be here. He looked up at Thalian Hall, the neat Greco-Roman construction, sparkling white in the evening light. God willing this would be over before it got dark.

    He had not liked seeing those negroes fall, but if they would not put aside all of this nonsense there was nothing else to be done. Robbins was not a nigger-hater. But the black man had his place. Everything had its place in the world. Robbins was a workingman, and that was all he was. Regardless of what the red strangers said, he did not want to grasp for anything more. He was content. Why could not the negroes be likewise?

    Robbins scanned the roof of the hall. He counted six men there, though there were probably more he could not see. Six men. White men. From down here on the street, he could make out the green armbands and in the Winchesters in their own hands. He could even call one of them by name—Bobby Tanner, who labored alongside him at the wharf, and who was now aiming a rifle at him from the roof of city hall.

    He simply could not understand them. This red Fusionist madness was just that—madness. There was nothing worth negro rule. Not the vote, not free silver, nothing. Why could they not see this?

    Robbins shouldered his rifle and sighed. The redshirts all along the line began knocking the stocks of their weapons against the ground, producing a chilling cacophony.

    Colonel Waddell, in characteristic fit of self-importance, had brought along a tanned thoroughbred, on which eh now sat. He clopped up to the head of the redshirts, reined his mount in, and shouted up at the hall. “Come on out! Silas Wright! John Melton! John Dancy! Come out, and we will guarantee your lives so long as you are gone from Wilmington by morning!”

    The red-orange rays of the sun blasted out in a sizzling halo behind Thalian Hall. Robbins shielded his eyes again.

    There was a brief moment of silence. Then one of the Fusionists up on the roof shouted down, “goddamn you Bourbons, and goddamn the Democratic Party!” He shouldered his rifle, drew a bead, and fired. The skull of a redshirt five down from Robbins exploded. The man sagged to the flagstones, blood and brain matter leaking from the ragged cavity just above his left eyebrow. He stared blindly ahead, mouth slack.

    Another moment of inaction passed.

    Then an eruption of fire burst forth from the redshirts on Thalian Hall. Bullets tore away chunks of marble. Shattered glass. Winchesters flashed in the windows as the Fusionists returned fire.

    As he dove behind the cover of a donkey cart, Robbins heard one of his comrades shout; “Damned niggers!”. But he himself was quite sure all of their opponents were, at least those he could see, white men.

    He poked his head out over the edge of the cart, only to pull it back down as a round snapped past his ear. He crawled around the side, got down on his belly, and balanced the rifle over one of the cart’s sagging axles. There was a Fusionist hiding behind one of the faux-Greek pillars. Occasionally he would stick his head out to fire into the mob of redshirts with what looked like an old wartime revolver. Robbins took careful aim. He stilled his breath. The next time the man emerged, he blew a hole in his chest. The Fusionist fell back dead. Thank God.

    The redshirts were strung out along the square before Thalian Hall, trapped behind carts or benches or bushes. The withering fire from up on the rooftops kept their heads down. But they had formed a loose cordon of men around the building. Robbins realized they had only to let the defenders exhaust their ammunition. Then they could storm the place at their leisure. And the enemy had squandered his last chance for mercy.

    Robbins heard the clattering of hooves on stone. He turned his head to see Colonel Waddell careering wildly behind the lines, waving his hand, shouting, ‘charge ‘em boys, charge ‘em!’

    Evidently, he seemed to believe it was ’63, and he was back on the field. But his words had an effect. Redshirts stood from behind their meager cover, readying for a frontal assault on the hall.

    Why not wait for them to run out of bullets? But Robbins did not have the gall to counter the mood, or his commander.

    “Charge e—” halfway through his well-worn cry, a rifle sparked in an upstairs window, and a bullet slammed into the colonel’s shoulder. He tumbled from his saddle with a howl. The shattered limb spurted blood.

    The sight galvanized the redshirts. With a cry they rose from concealment, shouldered their rifles, and advanced. Robbins stood, took a deep breath, and charged out over the blood-flecked square once more.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    The battle at Thalian Hall had been raging for nearly an hour when Colonel Taylor of the Wilmington Light Infantry finally decided to involve himself and his men.

    The Light Infantry was a company of militia stationed in Wilmington’s armory on market street. They had just returned from the war against Spain and were still technically in federal service. Thus, though the Infantry was firmly allied to the Democratic Party establishment and often served as its paramilitary wing, Taylor was reluctant to commit his boys the insurrection. He feared it would invite federal intervention.

    But now, after more than thirty minutes listening helplessly to the snapping of rifles and shouts of rageful, wounded men from only a mile away, he decided he could tarry no more. He marshalled his men and announced they were going to ‘put down this damned negro rebellion’, to cheers and hoots.

    The Light Infantry had an ace in the hole that would turn the tide of the battle in the favor of the redshirts. They had recently acquired a Colt rapid fire machine gun, purchased with the private donations of Wilmington’s wealthier citizens. The weapon was a killer, capable of firing up to 400 rounds per minute. Turned on the Fusionists, it would make the Winchesters and revolvers now in play look like children’s pop guns.

    Taylor ordered the Colt loaded up onto its cart, and they were off to Thalian Hall and the rescue of the embattled redshirts.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Daniel Wright fingered the action on his old 1858 Navy Remington. He tried to take heart in the numbers—he was not alone. But there were only twenty-three men in his division. Hardly fit to take on soldiers. They crouched in the shadows of a dark alleyway, listening to the rifles crack in the distance.

    Wright didn’t mind that Chief Melton had assigned white Fusionists to guard Thalian Hall and sent him and the other black militiamen to guard the roads on the route to the hall. If the whites wanted to take the brunt of the redshirts’ fire, that was alright with him.

    His division had been ordered to garrison the corner of 4th Street should the redshirts attack from the south. Most of the Democrats had ended up marching down from the north, and Wright and his fellows had not yet been forced to discharge their weapons. That, again, was alright with him.

    He did not want to be here. It was nearly dark now. He would very much like to be in bed. He poked his head around the corner. The streets were empty. All life in Wilmington was either struggling for Thalian Hall or locked away behind shuttered doors and windows.

    “You see something, Dan?” asked Walter Bruce.

    “See nothing yet,” Wright replied.

    No, he did not want to be here. But he had to be here. The green armband was tied tightly enough around his right arm it almost hurt. But it meant something. He was a man, for God’s sake. He ought to be free to cast his ballot and live in liberty just like any other man. And if he—or some redshirt son of a bitch—had to die to prove it, then just as well.

    Not twenty minutes before, a messenger had come from Chief Melton, who was still holed up in the hall with the mayor and the rest of the aldermen. The courier had slipped through the redshirt lines and bore an urgent order. Word was the Light Infantry was coming out of the armory and bringing the Colt.

    Everyone in Wilmington knew of ‘the Colt’. Mightier than fifty rifles, they said. And if the Colt was put to use, that would be the end for the Fusionists.

    So, Wright’s division had one task—when the soldiers marched by, seize the Colt.

    It hardly seemed possible. There were a hundred men in the Infantry, and while they would not send all one hundred up 4th street, they would send enough. Wright had only his thirty odd-boys with their rusty rifles and single-actions.

    But at the very least, they held the element of surprise. And that might count for everything.

    Wright heard a whistle. He looked up. It was Jim Bowman, the spindly timberman they’d placed up on the nearest roof to watch around the corner. The whistle meant the Infantry was on its way.

    Wright turned to the mass of dark shapes crouched behind him in the thickening shadows. Occasionally, their black faces were illuminated in the flash of rifle barrels or pistol cylinders. “Quiet,” Wright hissed. “Quiet, now! They’re comin’!”

    Soon enough, they heard the unmistakable cadence of horse’s hooves and polished boots against brick.

    In another moment, the head of the infantry column rounded the corner. Peeking just out of the alley, Wright watched the first rank of soldiers emerge into his line of sight, blue coats dark and almost black in the nearly vanished sunlight. They came up the road, about five abreast, and ten deep. So, there were about fifty. Half the Infantry, right here. Behind them came the Colt, drawn by a powerful grey workhorse, straining its muscles, the heavy gun bouncing along in its wake.

    The soldiers approached, faces grim, rifles primed.

    Wright signaled up to Bowman. Then he signaled to the men behind him. Thirty seconds. Then the column would pass their alley. That was their window.

    Twenty seconds. The soldiers neared, advancing inexorably towards the cacophony of the battle in the distance.

    Ten seconds.

    “Go on, boys!” Wright shouted. He and his division exploded from the alley, and burst upon the Light Infantry, shouting and shooting. Wright’s revolver flashed, and he blew the kepi from a sergeant’s head with a burst of brain and scalp. The man riding in the cart alongside the Colt toppled over, slain by a shot from up on the rooftops.

    The soldiers reeled, taken utterly on the back foot. They staggered backwards, fighting to shoulder their rifles and take aim.

    “Fuck! Fuck!”

    Wright saw through the corner of his eye one of his militiamen go down with a bullet in the gut. But he pushed on towards the soldiers, who increasingly bunched up against the far side of the road. The Fusionists worked their rifles and pistols with practiced ease, while the infantrymen sputtered and stumbled and fired wild, aimless shots into the dark sky.

    Wright slid a new round of bullets into his revolver. He crouched low, took aim again, and shot another soldier through the eye. The man crashed backwards through an apothecary’s window in a flurry of glass.

    Another Fusionist fell, taken in the chest. But the soldiers’ numbers quickly thinned. Well-drilled as they were, they simply had not been prepared. Three boys in blue threw down their rifles, turned, and sprinted off down an adjacent backstreet, to the raucous laughter of the Fusionists.

    When the number of the infantrymen had fallen to near twenty, a blue coated captain finally raised his arms in surrender and cried. “Halt! Halt, boys, halt!”

    His men quickly followed suit, throwing down rifles or pistols and instead throwing their hands into the air.

    The black militiamen rapidly surrounded them. A few swept forwards to collect the weapons.

    “Now,” said one of Wright’s lieutenants, as he plucked a Springfield from the arms of a red-faced Army corporal. “We’ll be takin’ the Colt.”

    Wright detailed ten men to guard the prisoners. Then he jogged towards the stilled cart where the rapid-fire gun sat. Amazingly, the horse had not bolted in the commotion. He rubbed the beast’s nose to calm it, and then mounted the cart.

    The machine gun was a fearsome looking weapon. He’d never seen anything like it. It was long, sleek, balanced like a camera on three stout legs. Wright ran a hand over its barrel.

    “Goddammit you let that thing be, boy!” cried one of the soldiers, who by now had been forced to his knees, with his hands behind his head. Wright smiled and slid a finger into the trigger guard.

    “It’s ours now!” he called back.

    A cheer went up. Wright hopped into the driver’s seat and took up the horse’s reins. The nearest ten or so of his men crowded into the cart alongside the machine gun.

    Those who remained to watch the prisoners marched the disarmed soldiers into the ruined apothecary at gunpoint. Wright snapped the reins, and the cart careened forward, racing towards the sound of gunfire. Racing for Thalian Hall.

    The redshirts would be expecting the Colt any minute now. And they would get it, alright.

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Bill Robbins was tired. He was again on his belly behind meager cover that would not stop a handgun bullet—only this time the cover was not an abandoned horse cart, but the heaped corpses of two fellow redshirts.

    The square before Thalian Hall was only some thirty meters wide, but it might as well have been a mile across, for all the effort it was taking them to cross it. The Fusionists hadn’t let up yet and picked off their besiegers with frustrating accuracy. As they should. Robbins knew many of the boys in the building and knew how they could shoot.

    Three sallies the redshirts had made towards the broad front doors of the hall, and three times they had been repulsed, leaving the stones of the square littered with the bodies of their comrades.

    Waddell, who had bandaged his wounded shoulder, had returned to the fray, and was again extorting his boys ‘forward, forward!’ This time, from foot rather than horseback.

    Another redshirt he did not know by name crawled up next to Robbins. “Listen,” the man said. “Them boys from the armory are bringin’ it in. Jes’ gotta hold on another minute.”

    Robbins took heart. The Colt. Thank God. That would decide the day.

    A bullet flashed on the stones just a few feet ahead of them. Both men flinched and pressed themselves tighter to the ground. The piled bodies serving as their scanty concealment had begun to turn white as the blood drained from their faces and hands. The blood leaking from their fatal wounds had turned a dark brown on their red coats.

    “Who were those boys?” Robbins’ companion asked.

    “Don’t hardly know. Not by name.”

    “Well, God rest ‘em.”

    “Right.”

    It was dark now, and the stars were blinking into being overhead.

    “Come on, boys! Charge ‘em! Charge ‘em!” Waddell, this time peeking out from over the top of a barrel, had taken up his cry again. The last three charges had not gone so well, but that was no reason not to try again, Robbins supposed.

    As if to hearten the attackers, at that moment some lucky redshirt scored a direct hit on a Fusionist crouching in a second-floor window. The man’s head snapped back with a splash of blood, and then he tumbled down over the ledge, striking the square with a hard crack of bone.

    The redshirts gathered their wits for another assault. God willing, this one would at last break the will of the defenders, and the hall—and the city—would be theirs.

    Then, they heard the clicking of horse’s hooves on stone.

    “The Colt! The army boys!” someone called.

    Robbins audibly breathed a sigh of relief. He turned, rolling onto his back, still not eager to stand and expose himself to the sharpshooters on the roof. Behind them, coming up from the south, moving as a dark shadow through puffs of gunsmoke, was the Colt mounted on its horse cart. The cart trundled closer. Robbins saw the wheels shudder on their axes beneath the weight of the heavy gun.

    The cart entered the square.

    And then the redshirts noticed something horrifying. The men in the cart were negroes.

    There was hardly a moment to process that, because then the Colt opened up. On them.

    Robbins heard the chatter of the gun like God’s hammer. He saw flames spark from the barrel. He watched six redshirts scythed down in quick succession by the monstrous weapon. One man’s stomach was torn open. His guts spilled forth and he toppled over them. The mound of intestines steamed in the chill evening air.

    The man beside Robbins leapt up. He charged the Colt. The next round ripped his chest open and burst out through his back.

    All discipline dissolved. Robbins saw Colonel Waddell sprinting for cover. He decided to do as much himself.

    The hell with it.

    He tossed away his rifle. He jumped up. He ran, amidst the screaming, panicked throngs of his comrades and the victorious hoots of the Fusionists.

    Robbins leapt over downed corpses. He skidded through pools of blood and gore. He only just saw the Cold tracking him out of the corner of his eye. A lance of pain shot into his side. He stumbled, rose, and kept running. Something warm and wet pooled at his hip. The pain exploded through his chest.

    The next bullet caught him just above the right ear and took off the top half of his skull.

    But he didn’t feel that one.

    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Excerpt from Black and Red: Socialists and the Race Question In the Late United States (Imperial University Publishing. Brisbane, 1963)

    By the time the bloodletting was through, the only redshirts left in the square before Thalian Hall were corpses or prisoners.

    The Battle of Wilmington had ended in a resounding victory for the Fusionists. In a grand twist of irony, this was thanks in no small part to the Colt machine gun meant to safeguard white-Democratic power.

    When it became clear the redshirts’ organization had been broken and their men scattered, the Fusionist divisions quickly devolved into death squads. Gangs of men sporting green armbands, black and white, roamed the streets of Wilmington, firing Winchesters into the air, calling “come on out, you damned Bourbons! Come on out!”

    Colonel Waddell attempted to take refuge in the armory with what remained of the Light Infantry, but a gang of Fusionists easily overpowered his protectors, dragged the colonel out, and hanged him from the nearest lamppost.

    The other Colonel, Taylor of the Light Infantry, was seized attempting to flee Wilmington in disguise, beaten, and then hanged himself.

    The captured redshirts were herded into the town jail, which was soon overcrowded by a factor of nearly ten. With passions as inflamed as they were, this problem was quickly solved by the summary murders of about three dozen.

    By now, news of the chaos in Wilmington had spread beyond the borders of North Carolina. Reports were confused. Many papers relayed it as a ‘negro riot’. Others as an ‘anarchic rebellion’.

    By the time Governor Russell sent in the state militia, most of the fighting was over. But redshirts and Democrats were still being murdered through the city. The militia arrived—and promptly failed to restore order, massively outnumbered as they were by the Fusionists, which were now also pouring in from outlying counties to vent their hatreds against the hated ‘Bourbons’ (a term quickly coming to refer to all Democrats, rather than simply those in the tradition of Cleveland). Soon, Russell was begging President McKinley for federal troops.

    McKinley could hardly have been faced with a worse decision. Most believed—including the president himself—that his victory in 1896 had owed at least in part to the staggering unpopularity of Cleveland following his actions in the summer of ’94. Now McKinley was confronted with the same terrible choice. He could refrain from sending in soldiers and be called a coward and an impotent. Or he could send in soldiers and become just another Cleveland.

    What’s more, if he did call in the army, there flowered a new dilemma. Should the troops tend to act in favor of the Fusionists, he would be tarred for abetting radicalism and rebellion. Should they tend to act in favor of the Democrats, he would be called a traitor to his own party, which was after all a major component of the bizarre Fusionist alliance.

    The president was distraught.

    In the end, he took a leap of faith and ordered in the army on 12 November, four days after the elections and two days after the worst of the killing had subsided.

    Luckily, neither the Fusionists nor the Democrats greeted the bluecoats with gunfire. The soldiers marched into Wilmington and took up posts in the armory and Naval Reserves billet, and the aging General Shafter declared martial law.

    The summary executions were stopped, and the dangling bodies removed (no one had found the courage, in particular, to cut down Colonel Waddell’s corpse until the soldiers arrived).

    The federal forces arrested some of the more egregious offenders on both sides, such as the Fusionists who had led the lynch mobs that killed Waddell and Daniels, and a redshirt who openly bragged about murdering unarmed blacks. But very few people were punished in the end.

    The army’s conduct was, amazingly, quite impartial.

    But by this point, it was clear to the nation that, with nearly 400 dead, Wilmington had become McKinley’s Chicago.

    But the latest carnage meant a great many things to a great many people.

    For the dying Democratic Party, the chattering of the guns at Wilmington was a death rattle.

    The party had been slipping into oblivion since 1894, but this was its final curtain. The returns in the ’98 midterms had left them with only 21 seats in the House and in the Senate, they’d been left with only 11.

    Wilmington proved the worst was true of the Democrats, both to their friends and foes.

    To enemies, the massacre proved the Democrats were the same traitors that had tried to destroy the republic not forty years before. They had lost an election, and so they had again risen in bloody rebellion to overturn its results by force. As a party, they had no place in any civilized system of government.

    To supporters, Wilmington demonstrated that the Democrats were weaklings, unable to conquer either at the ballot box or in the streets. The electoral and martial victory of the Fusionists in North Carolina disgusted many white supremacists in the deep south, including Pitchfork Ben of South Carolina, who declared that the denizens of the Tar Heel State no longer deserved to be called white men.

    By the winter of 1898, Democratic constituencies in the west and north were rapidly falling to the Populists and Socialists. By 1900, the Party of Jackson would be forced into its deep south strongholds, losing even the old border states, along with Georgia. There it would cling to life even until the last day of the Republic itself, but its time as a force to be reckoned with on the national stage was through.

    Wilmington was of course, also a watershed moment for the Populists. Bryan was greatly saddened by the carnage, and sharply rebuked an aide who suggested it was ‘an opportunity’.

    He was not sure how to respond. He knew the racial animus of many Populist voters—at the same time, he could hardly come out on the side of the redshirts and Democrats who had tried to throw out representatives of his own party.

    In the end, he announced that “I deplore bloodshed and terror—but the guilt cannot be charged to the men who sought no more and no less than the maintenance of their rights as free citizens of our republic.”

    He was immediately denounced as ‘nigger-lover Bryan’ by many Southern whites. Throughout the south and west, the Populists stressed to their white voters that it was not a ‘negro revolt’ that had come off in Wilmington. It was men—white men—defending their right to the ballot, and the participation of black men was purely incidental. This message garnered a mixed reception, but probably did to an extent help balance out the departure of whatever whites felt especially strongly about white supremacy.

    It is difficult to say whether Wilmington was a net gain or a net loss for Bryan’s party. It showed that they had successfully supplanted the Democrats in North Carolina among the poorer strata of whites. It had also endeared them to black voters. They were also well on their way to doing the same in Georgia.

    But at the same time, it allowed them to be tied to radicalism and violence, which Bryan had always tried his hardest to avoid. The presence of the Socialists in the Wilmington debacle also put into the heads of many the idea of a much closer association between the Populists and the SLP than really existed.

    Whether it was a help or a hindrance, it can be said with some certainty that it did not have the effect it did on the Democrats, one way or another.

    The Republicans were shaken by Wilmington. As soon as federal troops had secured the city, McKinley was deluged with letters and the pleas of congressmen urging him to either ‘harshly punish negro insurrectionists’ or ‘firmly defend the duly elected governments of Wilmington in particular and North Carolina in general.’

    McKinley was in a bind.

    He ordered federal marshals into North Carolina to examine the particulars of the vote as best he could. Some feared he would overturn the election as a sop to the Democrats, and to avoid being seen as friendly to the Populists (or worse yet, the SLP), but it was a baseless fear. The report returned to Washington, finished by the second week of December, stated that ‘the Fusionist coalition…fairly won its seats.’ And that the discrepancies that existed ‘would not have reversed the general result of the election.’ A new wave of despair overwhelmed North Carolinian Democrats.

    The troops remained to make sure the elected representatives were seated without fuss. These included two Socialists now in North Carolina’s legislature.

    This probably hurt McKinley in the end. Though the Populists and Socialists rejoiced, they would never have supported him anyhow, and McKinley alienated many conservative Republicans who would have been glad to sacrifice their fellows in North Carolina for the sake of retarding the Populist-Socialist advance.

    Wilmington also discredited the president in many quarters for the same reason that Chicago had Cleveland. Hundreds of people were dead. An American city had become a warzone. The national army had been deployed against fellow citizens.

    Undoubtedly the greatest gains from the whole debacle went to the SLP. Ironically, it had been by far the smallest part of the Fusionist coalition in Wilmington. But it loomed so large in the national consciousness by this point that the battle very soon came to be seen as a ‘red uprising’ by certain frightened Americans.

    The Voice naturally proclaimed, RED CARNAGE IN WILMINGTON.

    Even the New York Times noted the ‘numerous Socialists’ involved in the violence, which was a great exaggeration.

    But with at least one major voting bloc, the association with Wilmington helped, not hurt the SLP. That bloc was, of course, black southerners.

    Despite the strenuous efforts of the Populists to deny that Wilmington had anything to do with ‘negro suffrage’ except incidentally, and the occasional efforts of the SLP to do the same for the benefit of southern whites, it soon became an article of faith among blacks that ‘the reds came out for the negro in Wilmington’. Their prestige was boosted immensely across the old Confederacy.

    A black church in Mobile even flew a red flag for some time in early 1899, until the mayor personally ordered it removed.

    Peter Clark’s editorial in the Daily People (which DeLeon still occasionally grumbled about) belabored this point. “What force, what party, what band, since the great days of Lincoln,” it asked, “has taken up arms in defense of the black man and his rights? Only the Socialists.”

    In time, Wilmington came to be recalled by many as a Socialist affair, for better or for worse.

    Despite this, white support for the Socialists in the south was not significantly harmed, mostly because it was already so miniscule. Socialists became very good at talking out of both sides of their mouths, eager to encourage the perception that the SLP was the champion of the black man when talking to blacks, and just as eager to deny it was any such thing when talking to whites.

    Some progress was made among white sharecroppers and urban laborers in the south in the aftermath of Wilmington, though it was not until 1903 that support truly exploded.

    But it was black voters that Wilmington won over. In the presidential election of 1900, it is estimated more than 30% of southern blacks eligible to vote voted SLP, more than any other demographic besides industrial workers in certain regions. In 1904, the number climbed over 50%.
     
    Last edited:
    The Slaughter at Cripple Creek
  • Excerpt from Red Jack: The Life and Times of Jack London

    Jack London came to the mining town of Cripple Creek in April 1899. He was only two months back from his two-year long sojourn to Klondike, and naturally still wary of recognition and arrest for his spectacular would-be assassination of three years earlier. ‘John Chaney’ was long dead, and he would never use the name again. He traveled often and quietly, later claiming, “if I failed to cross a state line at least four times a year, I was moving too slow.” He took unskilled jobs of every sort, working as a timberman in Washington, a fruit picker in California, and now a miner, in Colorado. “My hands were horny, and my back still ached,” he would say, after the rigors of the frozen far north. But he was glad to be back in his country, and eager to reacquaint himself with it.

    The intense manhunt launched after his daring escape from San Quentin had long died down. The frontier had closed at long last, but the west was still a broad and often lawless land. So long as he maintained a low profile, he could live indefinitely in those wide-open spaces.

    But it was not in London’s nature to keep a low profile.

    It had been barely a decade since gold was first discovered at Cripple Creek. The town was founded on the spot in 1890, and like so many boomtowns, enjoyed an explosive growth in the following years. The population swelled from nothing to nearly 30,000, including thousands of men who trekked west to hack their living from the hard, sunbaked Colorado earth.

    There was no single method of mining gold in the region. Some men worked in the hard-dug underground tunnels carving raw ore out of the rock with hand and pickaxe, by the light of guttering lanterns. Others worked in the less-claustrophobic open mines, which were pits dug ever deeper and narrower, with staggered walls, so that they resembled sorts of inverted pyramids. Regardless, it was hard, grueling work. Injuries and deaths were commonplace. But it was profitable.

    By 1899, Cripple Creek was one of the largest towns in Colorado and turning out more than $2 million worth of gold per year.

    Many of the miners felt they were not seeing their proper share of the produced wealth. The men who toiled in the pits were often unskilled, impoverished migrant workers (either from abroad or other parts of the country) with no real personal ties to the settlements in which they worked and lived. Pay was not good, usually averaging at less than $3.00 a day. The old, conservative craft unions that had characterized the now-banned AFL tended to disdain such ‘unskilled’ labor, leaving these workers in the cold.

    It was a recipe for radicalism. And that incipient radicalism found its first real incarnation in the Western Federation of Miners.

    The WFM was formed in the aftermath of the bloody 1892 Coueur d’Alene strike in Idaho, where thousands of gold and silver miners went head to head with the powerful Mine Owners’ Association. It had ended in five deaths, the arrival of federal troops and defeat for the strikers, in a pale foreshadowing of the Red Summer.

    WFM president Edward Boyce did not intend for his new union to be of a kind with the timid, reformist AFL or the Knights of Labor. Those unions were, accurately or otherwise, seen as largely the preserve of skilled workers who had found a comfortable spot and would fight to keep it. The common laborers of the WFM had no comfortable spots. In fact, they had nothing to lose at all.

    As Boyce himself was to later say, in the end, “there can be no harmony between capitalism and labor”. The ultimate goal of the WFM was not to win for the workers a greater piece of the pie, but to smash the oven and bake a new pie.

    The WFM grew quickly, its ranks swelled by the discontented miners of the west. Its first great success, in fact, was in 1894, in Cripple Creek.

    There the gold miners had walked out en masse, when the owners connived to slash wages by fifty cents without a commensurate reduction in hours.

    The owners attempted to raise a private army under the auspices of county Sheriff Bowers, to either compel the strikers back to work or shunt them aside in favor of nonunion labor. Fighting broke out.

    Naturally, the state militia was called in. But in 1894, Colorado’s governor was Davis Waite. Waite was a firm Populist, and deeply sympathetic to the miners. Amazingly, the militiamen did not break up the strike—they defended it. In the end, the owners were forced to capitulate. Wages rose by nearly a dollar. It was a seminal victory, and the WFM grew accordingly.

    But this happy episode was concluded only months ahead of the outbreak of fighting in Chicago. And the hideous carnage in the summer of ‘94 made all but certain there would never be such a felicitous ending to a work stoppage again.

    When Jack London arrived in Cripple Creek in April of 1899, there were already whisperings that the mine owners were soon to launch another offensive, this one under the mantle of the Red Act.

    London easily got a regular job as a common miner—the mines were always looking for more hands. Viewing himself as a sort of radical spy behind enemy lines, he noted with some satisfaction that it “is an easy thing working under the master’s nose”. He took up residence in a ramshackle shack on the outskirts of town, dwelling alongside many hundreds of his fellow workers.

    Eager to spread the socialist gospel to the ostensibly ignorant proletarians of Colorado, London was shocked to find that much had changed since his arrest and self-imposed exile. In his own words, “these men were far ahead of me.”

    In the five years since Chicago unionist and even socialist sentiment had seen growth rapid enough to rival any boomtown. London later recalled that “we had a song we would sing, when we could get away with it.” He referred to a work song of unknown provenance, which included the lines:

    Debs was a howlin’ red, they said
    And so the bosses shot him dead
    He fought for home and life and bread
    And so they filled him full of lead.
    But when we paint this whole place red
    They’re gonna
    miss ol’ Eugene Debs!

    A crude song, with primitive rhyme, but indicative of the growing mood among western miners, soon to prove some of the most radical workers in the country.

    In the saloons of Cripple Creek, where the miners tended to congregate after the day’s work, London was first introduced to the WFM.

    He could not join fast enough.

    In the spring of 1899, there were rumors that the bosses were gunning for another pay cut. Waite wasn’t governor anymore, and if the militia was called out again, it would not be on the side of the strikers.

    The country was still reeling after Wilmington, and if there was ever a time to cry ‘red!’ as an excuse for a labor crackdown, this was it.

    London attended his first WFM meeting in early May. It was, he would later recall, the first time he ever heard ‘the Internationale’. Almost unknown in America before 1894, in the aftermath of the Red Summer the song was suddenly on ‘everyone’s lips.’ Though he had considered himself a convinced socialist since ’94, it was here he was first introduced to the concept of industrial unionism. “It made sense,” he would say. “That the workers ought to run things in proportion to their contribution to things. The miners ought to run the mines, and the steelworkers the steel mill. But it made still more sense that we ought not to split ourselves up as laborer, or blaster, or crusher. A miner was a miner.”

    London became well-liked by his fellow miners. On the edges of the open gold pits or during the brief, punctual lunch breaks, he entertained his comrades with memorized lines from Kipling and original compositions satirizing the mine bosses. He soon made friends with John Welch, a leading member of the Vinidicator Mine’s WFM local. Welch showed London his SLP party card with a sense of pride—outright membership in the party was still rare at that point, even as sympathy grew.

    On 15 May, the dreaded came to pass. The United Gold Mines, in collaboration with their counterparts leagued together in the Mine Owners’ Association, announced a reduction of 25% on the wages of unskilled workers, dragging a day’s pay from $3.00 down to $2.25, nearly undoing the gains of the strike in ’94.

    Similar pay cuts were made in mines across the state.

    The executive committee of the WFM immediately called a strike in protest.

    On 19 May, miners walked en masse out of the Vindication Mine and out of a dozen other mines across Colorado. A strike committee was formed, and out of the 800 or so common laborers at Vindication, London was elected to the council of fifteen.

    The Mine Owners’ Association had expected as much, though some of the bosses had hoped vainly the workers might acquiesce meekly.

    In Cripple Creek, the WFM worked quickly. Its members, like the rest of the country had watched as the troops marched into Chicago and New Orleans. They had flinched at the bloodshed in Lattimer. They had looked on in horror as the carnage in Wilmington unfolded.

    They prepared for the worst.

    Then Bill Haywood arrived. Haywood, the WFM’s treasurer and without a doubt its finest orator and organizer, had been in Crested Butte at the time, waiting for the wage cuts and the resultant strike he knew were coming. As soon as it came to pass, he made for Cripple Creek, the sight of that rare labor victory five years before.

    He arrived on foot three days after the beginning of the strike. London ‘knew Haywood was coming’, but he, like most men didn’t know what he looked like. So, when, leaving a conference of the strike committee in one of the town’s many saloons, and upon seeing a heavy, bulldog-faced man in a slouch hat and a dusty overcoat trudging into town, it did not even cross London’s mind that this might be Big Bill himself.

    “Imagine my shock when the fellow I figured for a tramp came out at the meeting later that night, stood up, and introduced himself as Bill Haywood.”

    The meeting in question was held in the same saloon and attended by nearly 100 miners and a number of local sympathizers, all crowded into the rickety little bar.

    London was mightily impressed with Haywood’s earthy, straightforward style of discourse. He didn’t put on airs. He was most amused by the man’s illustration of the critical difference between the old craft unions and the ideal of industrial unionism. “The old unions—the AFL—organized like this,” Haywood said, raising a hand with the fingers splayed. “We’re gonna organize like this,” he went on, and curled that same hand into a great, mighty fist.

    Haywood met with the strike committee after the speech, and London introduced himself.

    “Good to know you, son,” was the first thing he heard from Big Bill himself, London would remember decades later.

    In the backroom of the saloon, Haywood informed the committee that he had just come from Colorado City, where word was already that the MOA was begging Governor Peabody to have the militia called out.

    “We ain’t even killed nobody yet,” one of the committee delegates protested.

    Nevertheless, it was decided the miners ought to organize along paramilitary lines themselves if they were to survive the onslaught that was sure to come.

    At Cripple Creek alone (never mind the sympathetic strikes in Colorado City and elsewhere) there were upwards of 900 mine workers on board with the strike, and another 100-200 sympathetic men from town.

    The committee divided these men into six ‘divisions’ of about 150. These divisions were further divided into five ‘squadrons’ of about 15. The divisions were each commanded by an elected ‘captain’, and the captains would in turn elect the commander of their ‘division’.

    London was elected commander of 3rd Division, which was tasked with guarding the northern road out of Cripple Creek for scab labor or hired thugs.

    Living in the rough and tumble west as they did, many if not most of the men already owned weapons. For those that did not, the WFM pooled resources and purchased Winchesters and revolvers from local gunsmiths or sent for them from as far away as California.

    Soon, Cripple Creek was filled with patrolling squadrons of armed miners with red rags tied around their arms.

    Attitudes towards this were mixed. Some of the town’s residents were in full support of the strike, hanging red flags from their windows or wearing red armbands themselves in shows of solidarity. London recalled a young girl of about fifteen pinning red ribbons to the lapels of gruff-faced, pistol packing mine workers.

    Many were less than amused by the mood and glowered down at the strikers from their windows or refused to serve them food and drink. One saloon operator put up a sign announcing he would not sell alcohol to anyone wearing a speck of red.

    In the last week of May, the MOA attempted to bring scab labor into Cripple Creek, protected by Pinkerton men. 3rd division met them on the road out of town and turned them back at the point of rifles.

    A dozen mines across Colorado had joined in the action, but the miners at Cripple Creek were without a doubt the most militant and best organized.

    The WFM garrisoned Cripple Creek for the next two weeks, brusquely keeping those miners who did not wish to join in the strike away from the mine. Warning shots were fired, and a few men were beaten, but there was no real bloodshed. Not yet.

    The MOA grew desperate and finally Governor Peabody consented to call out the National Guard.

    Meanwhile, London and Haywood established an increasingly tight working relationship. Haywood often came along with his younger comrade and 3rd Division on patrol of Cripple Creek’s outlying roads. In downtime, he shared with London his vague but glowing idea of one big union, a union that would not only unite all of the workers in a given industry, but all the workers everywhere.

    “You describe,” London said. “Essentially a government.”

    “That’s exactly it,” Haywood said, beaming.

    Meanwhile, the nation watched, on edge, as it always was when some whiff of labor trouble carried on the breeze. Ever since Chicago.

    Congress ferociously debated whether the WFM was in contravention of the Red Act. Representative Henry Gibson from Tennessee rose and read off a list of outrages committed by the Cripple Creek miners, real and imagined.

    The fifty Socialist congressmen, led by DeLeon himself, attempted to drown him out by singing ‘the Internationale’ at the top of their lungs, until they were ruled out of order.

    The New York Times declared ‘Anarchy in Colorado!’

    Frick’s Voice naturally, was very loud. Under the heading ‘Red Horrors at Cripple Creek’, Pennsylvania’s industrious governor unfolded a lurid account of a town under a communistic reign of terror. Women assaulted, property burned, workers who were content with their wages threatened away from mines at gunpoint, beaten bloody if they did not comply.

    Some was true, some was not.

    Frick ended his editorial with a plea for federal intervention. Pointedly, he printed an open letter to President McKinley (who was increasingly coming to dislike him), asking if he was ‘president or not?’

    McKinley had indeed slept very little in the past two weeks. His popularity had taken a severe hit after Wilmington, and the accusations flung at him from various quarters (including many in his own party) charging him with being ‘soft on radicals’. He was beginning to wonder if his own party might not turn him out ahead of the 1900 election, as Cleveland’s had tried to do. Even if they did not, would the Republicans survive the upcoming election? The grim example of the Democrats, pathetically clinging to life in their shrinking southern strongholds, was sobering.

    Wilmington would have been bad enough? And now this?

    When Governor Peabody finally decided to call out the National Guard, McKinley could only pray it would end peaceably.

    400 National guardsmen arrived at Cripple Creek on 3 June, under the command of Brigadier General Sherman Bell. Bell had served in Cuba and was known for his humorless and brutal disposition.

    Bell marched down from the north, flags flying, himself astride a muscled black horse in a brazen show of intimidation. He was met on the road just outside of town by four squadrons from the miners’ 2nd Division, under the command of John Welch. The guardsmen defiladed and readied their weapons. The miners did the same.

    In the distance, the soldiers could see red flags snapping in the warm summer breeze over the dusty roofs of Cripple Creek.

    Welch emerged from among his men with a white flag of truce and was allowed passage through the lines to meet with Bell. But Bell was not interested in negotiation.

    “I am not here to negotiate, I am here to do you goddamned anarchists up unless you give yourselves over immediately,” Bell brusquely informed a stunned Welch. “You are unlawfully interfering with the operation of privately owned mines, you are unlawfully holding this town—you will relay this message to whatever rascal you have got in command of you all: you and every man who calls himself a member of the WFM has got twelve hours to lay down his arms and remand himself into the custody of the Colorado National Guard, or else we will use force—lethal force—to clear you from this town and these mines.”

    Welch, angered but unsurprised, nodded and departed.

    Of course, the strike committee did not consider surrender, voting 12-3 against it.

    The guardsmen set up camp on the hills to the north of town, within sight of the open pit gold mines, to wait out Bell’s twelve-hour ultimatum. He had essentially read the WFM men the old English riot act. Headlines were already being slammed out that read, ‘BELL GIVES SHORT SHRIFT TO MINERS’. Now there was only to wait for those miners’ reaction.

    That reaction was hotly debated. In the saloons and shops where the miners had set themselves up, men argued fiercely the merits of continued resistance or surrender.

    It was clear they could not win. This was not Wilmington, where the presence of the Populists and Republicans provided a note of legitimacy to the armed resistance. If it came to a fight, they would simply end up like the boys in Chicago. More martyrs. And, as London put it to the committee, “one live scoundrel is worth ten dead heroes.”

    But even as the debate raged on and as Bell watched his stopwatch tick down, more miners began to trickle in from El Paso County and Colorado City. It was clear that Cripple Creek was where the statewide strike would be decided. And so, it was here the most militant of the WFM wanted to be.

    They brought their own arms, extra ammunition, and even dynamite. When they marched through the dirt streets of Cripple Creek, they were greeted with the raucous cheers of their comrades and sympathetic townsfolk. Those not so sympathetic thought it better to keep silent than boo or hiss. For their own safety.

    The strength of the miners was soon raised to more than 1200.

    But even if the miners had outnumbered their foe 10:1, the odds of victory would have been slim.

    Then a mad plan was hatched. It is unknown who hatched it. Both London and Haywood later disclaimed it, though considering its ultimate conclusion, this cannot be taken as proof positive of their lack of involvement. It may have been Welch.

    The miners could not win a pitched battle. What they needed was bargaining power. Thus, developed idea of taking Bell hostage. After a further two hours of heated debate (three hours out from the end of the allotted twelve), it was decided to go ahead with it, though one committee delegate complained that “if we care to kill ourselves I know a good gulch only a few miles west we can leap into.”

    Nevertheless, initially the hare-brained scheme went along well enough. The soldiers had camped in a narrow valley to the northeast of the town, just below a craggy range of hills. They did not show the caution one might expect of soldiers on the battlefield. They severely underestimated their opponents, who they took for drunken rabble.

    Under cover of darkness, two of the miners’ divisions converged on the guardsmen’s camp. Three remained in town and at the mine to guard against sabotage.

    London’s 3rd Division crept over the hills, approaching from the east. 1st Division looped around from the gold mine to the south, thus forming an axis of approach at 90 degrees.

    Once the state troops were successfully invested, with their not even having noticed, a team of ten men was handpicked to carry out the mission.

    They crept into the camp with the object being Bell, wherever he was. Though they were instructed to refrain from violence if at all possible, they started off their infiltration by slitting the throats of two sentries.

    They did not get much further than that. A soldier spotted them slithering through the tents, and someone opened fire. Soon the camp was up and in a panic.

    Realizing things had gone sideways, the miners forgot their plan and simply attacked.

    The guardsmen may have had an advantage in training and equipment, but they were outnumbered and taken utterly by surprise. Squeezed in from two sides, fired upon from the elevated hills and from their obvious escape path to the south, the guardsmen panicked.

    In the ensuing gunfight, some 30 guardsmen were killed or wounded, for a price of only 14 miners.

    The rest were easily swept up and taken prisoner by the force more than twice their size.

    The victory was almost unbelievable. The miners had not only defeated their foe, they had captured more than 300 prisoners of war.

    The bitter guardsmen, headed by a scowling Bell, were marched through the streets of Cripple Creek. Onlookers pelted them with stones and rotten fruit, while the miners howled with laughter and fired their weapons into the air in celebratory elation.

    After the triumph, the prisoners were rounded up and herded into the mines. 2nd Division was assigned to guard them.

    “We felt like conquering heroes,” London said. “We had licked them.”

    Haywood immediately telegraphed Denver, informing Governor Peabody that he and the strike committee of Cripple Creek held in their hands the lives of several hundred Colorado National Guardsmen, and that he and the Mine Owners’ Association had best be prepared to negotiate.

    Peabody is supposed to have smashed his office window in rage.

    McKinley is supposed to have nearly fainted upon hearing the news.

    The hysteria in the national press was unmatched by anything since the Red Summer. Hearst’s New York Journal cried, ‘REDS HOLD KNIVES TO THROATS OF US SOLDIERS’.

    And McKinley, too, decided enough was enough. He was going to show the country that, yes, he was the president.

    It was General John ‘Blackjack’ Pershing who was detailed to take care of matters in Colorado. He had just returned from counterinsurgency work in the occupied Philippines, the burdensome prize the US had inherited from Spain. Pershing’s troops had spent the past year on the islands fighting a grueling, bloody war against native insurrectionists. The men were personally brutalized and not inclined towards respect for the niceties of ‘civilized’ warfare.

    The general told McKinley that he unless he received an immediate and unconditional surrender, he would ‘treat these men like Moro rebels.’

    Pershing embarked at Washington DC. His train steamed westward, seen off by a cheering crowd waving the Stars and Stripes.

    Meanwhile, the strike committee nervously awaited the next turn of events. Most of the other strikes, such as that at Independence Mine and those in Colorado City had fizzled out, either for lack of enthusiasm or in fear of sharing the imminent fate of Cripple Creek.

    But here, there was no sign of flagging morale, much less of surrender.

    “We were ready to go it alone and go it alone as long as needed be,” one miner would recall at his trial.

    London rushed to and fro in preparation for the arrival of federal troops. He also helped erect an open-air pen in which the National Guardsmen were held. They were not treated poorly at first, and indeed many established friendly relations with their captors.

    “They weren’t bad guys,” a striker said. “They were just doing what they had to do, same as us.”

    Haywood ordered that they be given rations in accordance with those taken by everyone else in town.

    A notable exception to the prevailing congeniality was General Bell himself, who seethed with shame at his capture and with hatred for his jailers. He promised to see Haywood and the rest of the strike committee strung up from trees and to see that the rest of the men never worked again. Soon enough, the miners ceased to take him seriously, and he became a figure of fun instead.

    By 6 June, Pershing and his 2,000 troops had reached Colorado Springs, and were now marching on Cripple Creek.

    Haywood posted four squadrons of miners on the road out of town, same as they’d done to greet the National Guard.

    But taking into account what had happened when Bell had attempted to give an ultimatum and an opportunity for surrender, Pershing did not make what he viewed as the same mistake. Instead, he stopped his march two miles out form town. He unlimbered the 2.5-inch guns he’d brought along on the march, loaded with HE shells.

    His gunners sighted their target—the collection of miners milling about on the road just beyond the town lines. They fired.

    The shells struck home.

    Some 40 miners were killed in the initial barrage. The remainder broke and ran back into the perceived safety of Cripple Creek’s streets and buildings.

    Pershing’s gunners adjusted their sights upwards and fired again. The next round of shells struck the rickety wooden homes and stores of the town.

    But Pershing had bad intelligence. He had been informed that the miners had forced most civilians out of their homes and towards the rear of the town (either to hold them as extra hostages or for their own safety—reports were conflicting). But this was untrue. Thus, when his HE shells found their marks this time, they killed very few armed miners, and very many unarmed townspeople.

    Pershing could not know this at the moment. He imagined he had wiped out the miners’ vanguard, so he ordered his troops to advance into the smoke and flames that were quick devouring Cripple Creek.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    “You imagine this is what it was like at Chicago?” Jack asked, arms crossed. He stood on a rocky promontory just to the southwest of Cripple Creek. He could see the town laid out in the distance, like a little toy settlement built on the floor of a child’s playroom. He could see the little ribbons of flame enveloping stores and houses, throwing up sheets of thick smoke into a darkening Colorado sky. And still further, the blue snake of federal soldiers slithering southward into the ruin. Beyond that, the ragged, whitecapped peaks of the Rockies stabbed into the horizon. It was almost a lovely sight.

    “I imagine,” Bill answered acidly.

    Jack heard the guns roar again. He swore.

    Both men sat astride ‘appropriated’ horses, for a better vantage point of the unfolding battle. Jack looked to his right. To the south of the town, he could see the open mines where he’d worked for the past two months. He could see the figures of the miners scurrying back and forth up and down the ledged sides of the pits, the barrels of their rifles glinting in sunlight.

    A little further. The hastily built pen, ringed with barbed wire, that held the national guardsmen. They didn’t seem much moved by the spectacle. From this distance looked like little tin soldiers in their uniforms, stripped of their arms. A skeleton detachment of forty armed miners guarded them.

    Jack dug his heels into his horse’s flanks. He turned to Bill. The man looked back at him with his bulldog face. His good eye fluttered closed for a second. The other, scarred and milky, stared ahead.

    “I’m off, Bill,” Jack said. “See how long we can hold them up.”

    “I’ll keep everything in order back here,” said Bill.

    “If I catch a bullet,” Jack touched the brim of his hat. “In the by and by.”

    “Ain’t no such thing.”

    “Right.”

    Jack spurred his mount down the hill. He whipped to the north and then the east, charging towards the stiff outline of Cripple Creek, starkly silhouetted by the growing flames.

    When he galloped into town, great puffs of dust racing behind him, the first thing he had to do was yank the reins hard. A stream of terrified townsfolk streamed past him, rushing west, away from the fight. A woman rushed by, carrying a bundle in her arms that he imagined was a babe. The woman tripped over her skirts. She went to the ground, only just kept from crushing the baby between herself and the dirt. An older man rushed by without stopping to help, clutching a hat in his left hand like it was the most precious thing in the world. The woman rose again and continued running.

    Jack roughly forced his horse through the crowd.

    “They’re shelling the goddamned town!” someone howled, as if that were not obvious.

    A girl and her sister very nearly got themselves crushed under Jack’s stallion. He veered hard to the left and missed them. They stumbled along, and he continued his push against the flowing river of humanity.

    As soon as the gunfire was near enough that he could taste powder, he leapt from the animal’s back. He slapped the horse’s haunches and sent it off galloping in the way it’d come. Then he drew his revolver, bent his head into the burning wind, and plunged into the fray. As he pushed further towards the fight, the crowds grew thinner. Everyone who could flee already could.

    Jack bounded past a barber’s shop wreathed in flames. Looked like one of the army boys’ shells had scored a direct hit. He heard screaming from within. Or maybe it was just splintering wood and crackling fire.

    The first of his comrades he ran into was a boy. Or at least he looked as much. His smooth cheeks and chin were splattered with dust. A trickle of blood poured down his forehead. The red armband on his right arm was nearly invisible beneath all the grime of the fight. He staggered aimlessly towards the rear.

    Jack gripped his shoulders.

    “Hey! Hey!” The boy stared blankly ahead. “Hey!” Jack repeated, harder. “Boy!”

    “Wha—”

    “What’s your unit?”

    He felt silly like this—asking units and barking orders.

    “Seventh squadron, 3rd Division,” the boy said, sounding distant and quiet.

    “Right,” Jack said. “That’s mine. Come on. You’re back in the fight.”

    “I—”

    Now!”

    The boy listened. Together they charged down the street until they found what they were looking for. One of the barricades that had been strung across the road the night before. Piled up wood and stone and mortar. Jack ducked as a bullet winged over his head. The buildings on either hand were in flames.

    Some twenty men in dusty overalls manned the barricade. One dipped down and worked the lever on his Winchester while the other fired. Then the other took the chance to reload while his fellow fired. So, the men worked. They were well drilled for miners. He was almost proud.

    Jack rushed to the barricade. He threw himself flat against it, as the soldiers wreathed in smoke on the other side sent another barrage overhead. The miner beside him, working a Winchester as fast as his hands would allow, turned to Jack and scowled.

    “You gonna shoot or sit there, boy?”

    Jack decided not to reveal himself as their on-paper commander. What was the point?

    Instead, he poked his head up over the barricade. In the swirling smoke he could see the blue coats of the soldiers rushing back and forth. One huddled in the window of a smashed-up chemist’s shop to the left. He leveled his pistol and fired. God knew if he hit or not.

    His heart walloped in his chest.

    “Goddamn the army!” he shouted, and then whooped with laughter.

    The boy he’d brought back stared at him as if he was mad. But the lad had recovered his nerve and was firing into the oncoming soldiers along with his fellows.

    The soldiers were attempting to avoid the open road by moving down through the buildings on either side. Except half the buildings were on fire.

    Jack saw two men sprint across the street, toting their heavy rifles. He identified them as corporals both, by their chevrons. They were making for the smashed in doorway of a listing apartment building on the other side of the way. He expended the rest of his cylinder in their direction. Two shots missed. Another struck corporal number one in the head and the top of his skull was torn away. His pal skidded to a stop in shock. It was long enough for one of the miners on the barricade to drop him. He fell beside his friend.

    The responsible marksman raised a fist in celebration—and then was promptly himself felled by a US Army bullet.

    Jack winced as the miner’s corpse tumbled backwards. His comrades paid it no mind for the moment. They kept firing.

    “I’m dry!” one man howled.

    Jack tossed him a pack of rounds.

    Then he sprang back off of the barricade, just as a wall of blue came rushing down the street, glinting with bayonets. He snatched up the fallen miner’s rifle.

    “Where the hell you goin’?” one of the miners demanded.

    He paid the man no mind and sprinted off, around another corner. The building he was looking for. Ah yes. There it was. The saloon. It wasn’t on fire. Not yet. He bulled through the door, smashing it open with a shoulder. Vacant, of course. Empty or half-empty bottles littered tables and the floor. He kicked them aside and rushed up the stairs.

    The first room to his left, the one the proprietor rented out to travelers, possessed a broad window overlooking main street, up through which came the soldiers. Just what he needed. He could see the troops moving below in a narrow line, like an arrow, towards the barricade, oblivious to his presence. He breathed, hard.

    Jack remembered the wind rushing into his face as he clung to the side of a train in south Canada. A ship pitching beneath him in the dark waters off of Japan.

    None had got his heart racing like this.

    He shouldered the rifle and drew a bead on another corporal. Crack! The man went down, chest spurting bright red. His comrades sprang aside. He lined up another shot and narrowly missed a captain’s head. The man did not even notice his brush with death amid the din, even though the passing bullet tore his cap off.

    Still focused on the barricade just ahead, the troops hadn’t yet realized they were being fired upon from above. Jack aimed again. This time he missed. The bullet dug into the earth, sending up a spray of dust around the feet of the panicked soldiers.

    The artillery roared in the distance. He felt a rush of heat over his face, and then a cloud of ash came rolling from the next street over. Pershing had let off the big guns again. Bastard.

    He focused on his targets. One more shot. He worked the lever on the Winchester. The shell clattered at his feet. He fired. This one caught another blue coat in the shoulder. The man went down, howling, only Jack couldn’t hear his screaming over the hissing flames and the thundering howitzers.

    Then one of the soldiers’ head swiveled up. He was pointing. At Jack up on the second story. They’d seen him. He sprang away just as a fusillade smashed in through the window and pockmarked the surrounding wall.

    Ah, they were going to lose. He knew. He’d known since the army showed, of course. And there would be much blood. Maybe more than Chicago. But he’d never felt more a living man. Finally, finally they were fighting back. And the bosses, the troops, the presidents could not hold them down forever. One day they would run out of bullets.

    Jack sprinted back down into the street. And then away from the battle. He did not see the soldiers break through the barricade he had helped man, nor watch its defenders cut down in a flurry of machine gun fire.

    He raced towards the rear, where he’d left Bill.

    They’d make it out. They’d make it out. He’d slipped out of San Quentin; he’d slip out of this. They’d make it out, and they’d come back. This was only the start. The fire was kindled. It would spread and spread.

    As he ran, buildings crumbled alongside him, consumed by the fire. Rifles sizzled and snapped. Artillery continued to grumble.

    He could taste smoke. Taste copper.

    The day was here.

    He could taste it.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    The Battle of Cripple Creek lasted only five hours, not the days it took to recapture Chicago.

    But in at least one major respect, it was far worse.

    What happened precisely remains a source of extreme controversy.

    What is known is that at some point just before nightfall, presumably as they realized the day was lost, some of the miners began taking their National Guardsmen prisoners into the mines in batches and shooting them.

    In the aftermath, some of the executioners claimed Haywood himself had ordered the deaths of the prisoners, lest they be rescued by the advancing federals.

    Haywood, to his dying day, denied ever having given such an order.

    The truth will likely never be known.

    Regardless, when Cripple Creek was in ashes and the surviving miners rounded up at gunpoint, Pershing’s troops entered the gold mines and found heaps of corpses in National Guard uniform. Notably not among them was General Bell, who survived his captivity, with a renewed hatred for radicals of all stripes.

    All in all, nearly forty National Guardsmen were killed, most of them slain by singular bullets to the head, ‘like cattle’.

    The discovery precipitated a great rage in the soldiers, who decided to repay in kind. Some thirty unarmed miners were dragged out of line and shot before Pershing was able to restore order.

    It was about this time that Pershing learned that he had been mistaken in his belief there were few to no civilians left in Cripple Creek when he shelled it. The general watched, utterly horrified, as the charred bodies of women and children—victims of his artillery—were hauled out of the smoke and ashes.

    Reportedly, Pershing spent nearly twenty-four hours in his tent. He sat in utter silence, ignoring the subordinates that came to coax him out and the telegrams from Washington demanding updates as to the situation.

    He attempted to keep photographers from the scene, but to no avail. Within two days, lurid reproductions of the carnage, from burnt homes to overflowing mass graves, graced the front pages of half the newspapers in the nation.

    The final death toll, including civilians, National Guard, rebel miners, and federal soldiers, was reckoned at somewhere between 800 and 1,000.

    Not quite a Red Summer, but it was close. Too close.

    Bill Haywood was in Mexico by the time the federal government really started looking.

    Jack London had vanished. In fact, within two weeks, he was working as a logger in western Oregon under the name Charlie Green.

    Their flight was—depending on who was asked—a cowardly abandonment of their comrades, or their only alternative to a kangaroo count and a firing squad a la Debs.

    It was a rather theatrical opening act to Jack London’s life as a revolutionary—and it was just that, an opening.
    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    In the aftermath of Cripple Creek, most Americans broadly agreed that enough was enough.

    Of course, not everyone could agree on what they’d had enough of. Was it anarchistic lawlessness or the persistent tyranny of the capitalist class?

    The Daily People and other Socialist-aligned papers presented the tragedy as yet another example of capital’s relentless aggression against peaceable working people. They seized upon the fact that Pershing had dropped shells on women and children to portray him as a deranged soldier brutalized by his experiences overseas. He was a ‘Battle-crazed madman who whetted his martial appetites on the poor, primitive tribesmen of the Philippines and has now slaked them with the blood of American girls and babes’. They pointedly ignored that, though it was a terrible misunderstanding that had led to the 100 or so civilian deaths in Cripple Creek, it was ultimately a misunderstanding

    Frick’s Voice along with the New York Times and other publications that leaned conservative of course maintained that ‘the sad drama in Colorado is only the latest of the very many acts of blatant subversion directed by the forces of disorder and ochlocracy against the most basic foundations of American constitutional liberty. Coupled with the horror in Wilmington, one almost suspects organized conspiracy against our republic.’

    287 men and women were brought to trial for their part in the bloodshed. Again, the charges were insurrection and treason. They were indicted under the Red Act. 73 were ultimately set at liberty. 172 were sentenced to prison terms ranging from a year to a lifetime. 41 were condemned to the hangman’s noose.

    It was the largest single issuance of death sentences since ’94, which had seen more than 200 sentenced to die (though a great number of these had been commuted).

    Naturally, popular opprobrium fell largely on the SLP and the STLA. The tactless DeLeon did not help matters when he gave a blistering speech in congress in which he essentially intimated that the soldiers and National Guardsmen dead at Cripple Creek deserved to die. He finished by calling the horror ‘an opening act’, even as his fellow Socialist congressmen Demarest Lloyd attempted in vain to restrain him.

    On 30 June, a few weeks after the end of the battle, the offices of the Chicago SLP, the party’s largest national branch, were raided by police and its functionaries arrested. The offices themselves were ransacked and trashed. There was no real cause for the arrest besides the recent bloodletting, and the Socialists were released from jail within the week. But it well illustrated the prevailing moods.

    In many more radical communities, enmity towards the US Army and other ‘forces of order’ was growing quickly. Most Americans had always had a respect for servicemen, even when they disagreed with a particular war or particular deployment of military force. That was changing.

    In Pittsburgh, three young soldiers returning from the Philippines were attacked and beaten while walking through a slum populated primarily by immigrant ‘hunky’ steelworkers and their families. One was shot, though he survived. The incident was initially taken for a routine robbery, but the soldiers and some bystanders then reported that the assailants had shouted ‘long live Debs!’ which gave the whole affair a new dimension.

    Of course, it provided much grist for anti-immigrant editors who inveighed against ungrateful, violent aliens attacking wholesome young patriots just returned from active duty.

    But incidents like this soon became, if not common, at least common enough that they no longer merited national attention. In various neighborhoods of New York, Chicago, or Pittsburgh, it was advised that men in federal uniform or even policeman’s garb avoid certain areas unless in force, lest they catch an insult or a bullet.

    As for the WFM, it was naturally proscribed within weeks. By a stroke of luck, the WFM had not yet affiliated with the STLA at the time of the battle, though preparations were underway. Thus, the SLP could disclaim any direct connection with the massacre, and thus maintain a stringent legality.

    That legality infuriated many.

    Majority leader Sereno Payne said in the House, directly addressing the Socialists, that it was ‘this country’s shame that men who think and act in accord with the criminal doctrines of Marx and Robespierre are allowed to sit in this very congress alongside the representatives of the people’.

    George Boomer, a millworker by trade and Socialist representative from Washington, lost his temper, jumped up, and shouted that Payne ‘had better watch his goddamned mouth.’ He was quickly ruled out of order.

    Even if Cripple Creek had not occurred, tensions would have risen sharply. After all, next year was 1900. Election year.

    Perhaps no one was as distraught as President McKinley. Beginning his presidency as a broadly popular leader, especially in the aftermath of the disastrous Cleveland administration, his approval had been slowly eroded over the next two years.

    When McKinley had come to power, he had hoped to oversee the recovery from the crisis of ‘93 that had wrecked the country’s economy. Such a recovery had begun in ’97 but was creeping along far too slowly for the liking of most. It was summer 1899, and unemployment was hovering at 11% and had hardly budged in nearly a year. Some of his advisors, including New York governor Theodore Roosevelt, suggested this was at least in part thanks to the slashing of wages in industry that had become ever more common since ’96 and the Red Act. McKinley agreed that this might be the case. But he feared moving decisively against business and the ever-fattening trusts. In the current political climate, he did not want to be seen as friendly to or supportive of ‘radical’ labor. A plan to create an ‘Industrial Commission’ headed by Roosevelt to root out corruption and wrongdoing in the industrial economy was scrapped after the Battle of Wilmington.

    The result of this timidity towards capital and unwillingness to act in favor of labor cost McKinley much of the support he had maintained among workers in 1896. Many of these disillusioned laborers filled the ranks of the SLP.

    Thus, in 1899, McKinley was vastly less popular than he had been less than three years prior.

    The ones Clarence Darrow mockingly referred to as ‘the good people’ increasingly began to fear anarchist assassins in every shadow. Clearly the Red Act was not enough. They wanted to feel safe.

    Henry Frick’s attacks on the administration’s supposed unfitness in the Voice became ever more strident and aggressive. “Mr. President,” he began one editorial. “The republic has a red knife to her throat. What will you do for her?

    Frick was beginning more and more to grate on the nerves of the president, and on those of Mark Hanna, the Republican Party’s chief power broker. His Voice had reached a circulation of nearly 600,000, and he had amassed a huge and loyal readership.

    It was when Frick finally outright asserted that “Mr. McKinley is no longer acting in the best interests of the country,” that Hanna realized, as he said to McKinley, “my God, the man wants to be president.”

    Sure enough, in September of 1899, Governor Frick announced he would be seeking the Republican nomination in 1900.
     
    Last edited:
    The Birth of the Twentieth Century and The Election of 1900
  • St. Petersburg, Russian Empire


    17 June, 1899 [O.S]

    Alix ran two fingers through her newborn daughter’s fine, honey hair. The infant looked up at her with great blue eyes. Alix sighed. The little girl’s cheeks were a bright, rosy red, as a babe’s should be. She had cried for hours, but now she was silent.

    The diminutive Grand Duchess only watched her mother with those helpless, mournful eyes. In rapt silence.

    Alix felt a lump in her throat. She wondered for a moment, if she was not an empress—then no one would care for her daughters. Except her. But she was an empress, and so her children would never truly be her own. Duty. Honor.

    She rocked the infant gently. The girl smiled. Or seemed too.

    This was the third.

    Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna Romanova.

    There was something special about this one. Something distinct and particular in those marine eyes that her elder sisters lacked. Something sad. Or terrible. Alix could not quite tell. Perhaps it would reveal itself as the child grew. Or perhaps not.

    A cool wind blew in through the open window. The sky outside was stark blue. She could hear the Neva running. Spring was here.

    Maria blinked sweetly. She pawed at her mother with a tiny, chubby hand. Alix’s heart warmed, and she squeezed her daughter’s little forearm affectionately.

    Whatever was in those eyes—terrible or tragic—it was portentous She could feel it. Something was in the offing.

    There were footsteps behind her. She whirled around, with Maria clutched tight to her breast. And she breathed a sigh of relief. It was only Nicholas.

    The Tsar and Autocrat of all the Russias reeled a bit. “I’m sorry, Alix,” he said. “I did not mean to startle you.”

    “You didn’t,” Alix said.

    Maria did not cry, through all the commotion. Nicholas approached. He looked down into his little girl’s cherubic face. He had the look of a proud father. But something else, also. Alix’s heart broke. Maria was not a son.

    “They say she is a curse,” Nicholas said.

    “Who?” Alix demanded, immediately. Who would dare—

    “The people,” Nicholas responded, sadly. He tugged his beard. “A bad omen. Another daughter.”

    “Well,” Alix managed to say. Her throat closed up a bit. “Then she is our curse.”

    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    1900 began with the executions of the 42 Cripple Creek rebels. They were hanged in batches in Denver over the space of a week from 11 to 19 January. It was the largest mass execution in US history.

    And it did not augur well for the election year.

    The Democratic Party still shambled along, oblivious to its own death. The two years since Wilmington had hollowed out whatever remained of the party, except its die-hard core in the deep south. The northern immigrant workers that had once been such a reliable base deserted in droves to the Populists or the Socialists. Northern conservatives who had once voted Democrat either switched their allegiances to the Republicans or simply ceased voting entirely. Even many Catholics went over to the GOP, something that would have been nigh unimaginable a few decades before.

    Appeals to free trade or limited government had simply lost the force they once had. All that remained was the south, and the Democrats’ final but potent weapon of racial animus.

    Membership had dropped everywhere, by upwards of 50% from 1894 in most of the north. Even in the south it had fallen as many white farmers voted Populist tickets. But they still had a solid core of voters below the Mason-Dixon line. And now it was almost a purely southern party.

    In the running for the nomination were John Daniel of Virginia, John Morgan of Alabama (both men were ex-Confederate officers), Arthur Pue Gorman of Maryland, John Palmer of Illinois (the only northerner seriously considered), and Ben ‘Pitchfork’ Tillman of South Carolina (the convention thus became popularly known as 'the Convention of the Three Johns).

    So far had the Democratic Party in the north collapsed that the now overwhelmingly southern leadership did not even bother to raise delegations from many states above the Potomac.

    Thus, there were only 370 delegates up for grabs.

    In the first round, Tillman received 133 votes. Palmer received 108. Daniel received 86. Gorman got 24. Morgan took 14.

    On the second ballot, Palmer received 127, Tillman soared to 182. Daniel dropped to 64. Gorman and Morgan both got nothing.

    On the third ballot, Tillman took Daniel’s delegates and got to 246, leaving him one maddening delegate short of the two-thirds majority he needed for the convention. The Palmer delegates argued that Tillman’s nomination was ‘suicide’. He was a rabid white supremacist, even by the standards of his region. He was angry, intemperate. No one outside the deep south would dream of voting for him. Again, it was suicide.

    Some wag called out ‘the party’s already dead!’ to raucous laughter.

    Tillman managed to peel away three of Palmer’s delegates, and so he became the Democratic nominee for president in 1900.

    Puck magazine depicted a deranged Tillman stabbing to death the ass on which he rode with a pitchfork. The ass was of course, labeled, ‘Democratic Party’. They were hardly the only ones to mock the depths to which the party had sunken to put up Pitchfork Ben for president.

    Indeed, the Democrats held out no real hope of victory. Not after their drubbing in 1896 and continued slide in ’98.

    Their aim was to rack up enough votes to deprive anyone else (presumably either McKinley or Bryan) of a majority, which might allow them to play kingmaker.

    The Populists’ nomination was much easier. Bryan won uncontested. This time, there seemed a real chance he might win. The loss of support the party had suffered since 1896 had not yet become clear.

    Bryan, as disturbed as anyone else by the ever-worsening violence and unrest in the country, said that he went “into the election with a heavy but determined heart.”

    The SLP this year had a new candidate. In 1896, Clarence Darrow had been offered the Socialist nomination. He had declined it then. But it had been four years, and Darrow’s views had radicalized markedly since then.

    At a speech in New York in December 1899, Darrow announced his candidacy to an audience of STLA unionists.

    “When a federal judge and jury sentenced Eugene Debs to die, their pouches heavy with the railway bosses’ gold, he deigned to prophesy. With his heart bared to all mankind, he spoke a hard and simple truth. He said, ‘one day there will arise in this land a great commonwealth of toil, or else the despotism on display in Chicago and New Orleans will become general’. I dare any man to charge that he spoke falsely. And if any man so dares, he may tell it to the widows of Cripple Creek, who have seen their husbands and sons cut down by troops marching under the national banner, for they had the temerity to demand humanity. He may tell it to the people of Wilmington, who gave all, even their heart’s blood, in defense of their rights as free men. The day of which Debs spoke is come. You can see the webs of tyranny woven round the stricken body of this republic. You can see them in the glittering of a soldier’s bayonet, in the hollow eyes of a wasting child begging bread from strangers. You can feel them tight around your own limbs. Around your spirits. You may burst them yet, but tarry and they will become unbreakable. That is the choice before you, now—liberty or slavery.”

    Emil Seidel reprised his role as vice presidential nominee—for he was of immigrant extraction and a manual worker by trade, a fine contrast to the old-stock, patrician Darrow.

    It was in the Republican Party where the true drama unfolded.

    McKinley should have easily been re-nominated. He would have been, in any normal election cycle. But of course, 1900 was no normal election year.

    Henry Frick had begun laying the groundwork for his presidential run in 1898, when he took to ingratiating himself with the Republican Party in Pennsylvania, making new friendships and reaffirming those he already maintained. He established a close relationship with Pennsylvania’s Republican Party boss Matthew Quay, offering him generous shares in Carnegie Steel (he had not yet renamed it ‘US Steel’—he kept the Carnegie name long after splitting with his partner. Many suspected, for the sole purpose of irritating Carnegie himself). The LDP, in which Frick held much sway, made hearty contributions to the state party’s coffers, and to Quay himself.

    It was in ’98 that Frick also began making occasional trips to Washington, where he met other significant party figures such as New York party boss Thomas Platt and general kingmaker of the GOP Mark Hanna. Hanna personally did not like Frick, finding him arrogant and his cool, unemotional manner concerning. But he recognized the man’s ambition and the sort of magnetic power he could exert over others.

    Frick’s lifelong friend and collaborator Andrew Mellon also did his part. Mellon, a banker, was owed favors by a number of politicians, who in turn could put in good words for Frick in the halls of power.

    Frick had made certain he was a household name nationally through the massively successful Voice of the Nation. When he announced his candidacy, no one would ask who he was.

    In February 1900, Henry Frick announced that he would be seeking the Republican nomination for president. McKinley had proven unequal to the tasks at hand, he said. The anarchy threatening the country had to be dealt with, and swiftly. He was the man for the job. Hadn’t he done as much at Lattimer? Unlike McKinley and Cleveland, when red agitators sprouted up on his watch, he cut them down without burning cities and butchering civilians.

    McKinley and Hanna were annoyed, to say the least. They did not take him seriously at first but would have preferred no one put up so much as a token challenge to the sitting president. The thing ought to come off as smoothly as possible in times like this.

    They only began to worry when it was found one could hardly turn a corner without smacking into someone with a copy of the Voice in their hands or wearing one of the mass-produced ‘Frick’ buttons featuring the steel magnate’s stern aquiline profile silhouetted black. Frick was wealthy, and he used that wealth to make certain his message was heard. He organized speeches by such figures as General Sherman Bell, the commander of the National Guard who’d been taken prisoner by the miners at Cripple Creek. Bell regaled audiences with lurid tales of red atrocity, true and untrue. He described his poor boys, still in their uniforms, led off by wild-eyed WFM men to be shot down like animals. He finished his addresses by asking his listeners to support Frick. ‘The only man on the stage who even really knows there’s a problem, and the only man who wants to do something for it. The man of the hour.’

    That was soon enough Frick’s slogan.

    The man of the hour.

    By the time the convention arrived, in mid-June, McKinley and Hanna realized they’d severely underestimated the man of the hour, and the mood of the time. Frick would have never stood a chance in 1892, before the Red Summer. Even in early ’98, he would have had trouble picking up the support he needed for a successful challenge of a sitting president. But this was an America that had seen Wilmington and Cripple Creek, on top of ’94.

    It was a new world.

    Frick’s supporters at the convention included Quay and Mellon, and a number of lesser known men, most hailing from the industrial belt, where labor troubles had been the direst, and a few from the west.

    No one expected Frick to win, but his presence, and the presence of his boisterous delegates, was unnerving all on its own.

    On the first and only ballot, McKinley took 712 delegates, an outright majority, and more than enough to cinch him the nomination. But that left an astonishing 208 delegates for Frick. The fact that he had won even so many did not bode well.

    “That man,” Hanna said to Theodore Roosevelt, McKinley’s running mate, “is mad. He has got anarchists on the brain.”

    “The problem is,” Roosevelt replied. “So does the rest of the country.”

    The Republican leadership hoped that would be the end of this silliness. Now Frick and his delegates would fall in line, and McKinley would go on to victory. Even if might be a narrower victory than the last time.

    Instead, Frick’s delegates horrified their fellows when nearly half staged a noisy walkout, singing ‘Hail, Columbia’.

    The horror deepened when the Voice announced that Frick would be running for president anyhow, on the ticket of the newly formed National Party.

    “Who in God’s name does the man think he is?” Hanna demanded.

    He thought he was Henry Clay Frick, evidently.

    And the race was on.

    McKinley languished in something of a depression for much of the campaign. He felt a measure of guilt for the travesty his first term had devolved into. More than he campaigned, his running mate, Theodore Roosevelt, campaigned.

    Roosevelt was a New England patrician, but one of exceptional drive and vitality. He had an affinity for the natural world, and the world at large. He had completed a study of the birds of the Adirondacks while at Harvard, spent some time working as a rancher out west, and finally composed a naval history of the War of 1812.

    He had served with distinction in Cuba and ridden his wartime heroism into the New York governor’s mansion. But Roosevelt was something of a maverick in the political establishment. He was a whirlwind of reform, rooting out the deep-seated corruption in New York’s civil service, replacing dirty cops and aldermen by the score. He also brought his powerful affection for nature to the office, establishing wildlife preserves in the Catskills and striking hard against the excesses of business, whether that be maltreatment of workers or effusive pollution. He soon drew the ire of the stolid conservatives that peopled his state’s Republican Party, including Matthew Quay, briefly an ally before he grew weary of Roosevelt's idealistic antics. Quay contrived Roosevelt’s nomination to the vice presidency (McKinley’s first VP, Hobart, having died suddenly of a heart attack in 1899) with the intention of getting him out of the way.

    Roosevelt reluctantly acquiesced.

    But once on the campaign trail, there was little reluctant about him. He may not have been thrilled about his new position, and he may not have been in good accord with McKinley on many things (McKinley was a solid conservative, and Roosevelt anything but), but he pulled hard for the man. It has often been said that Roosevelt saved the 1900 campaign. This is surely an exaggeration, but not a great one.

    Roosevelt reminded listeners that the economy was improving under McKinley, even if it was not improving as quickly as everyone would like. He counseled patience. He harped on the Spanish-American War, never allowing prospective voters to forget that the United States had won that war and won it under McKinley. He was fond of waving the hat he’d worn into battle at San Juan Hill, complete with the bullet holes in the brim. Roosevelt had a bright, vivacious manner that one ‘could not help but be cheered by’, as one spectator remembered.

    Many began to mumble that they wished Roosevelt were running for president.

    But he began to irritate his own party fellows again, when he turned his attentions to the dire straits in which so many American workers found themselves. In a speech before Pittsburgh ironworkers—by 1900 a key Socialist constituency—Roosevelt excoriated the ‘greed’ of the great trusts and called the LDP ‘very nearly a criminal enterprise’. He received raucous cheers, but Hanna and his old mentor Thomas Platt upbraided him for the outburst, demanding that he never ‘go spouting off like Gene Debs ever again.’

    Roosevelt quietly but firmly disagreed. He told McKinley himself that he could take a stand against ‘men like Frick and Morgan’ or watch ‘the ranks of the anarchists explode’.

    He went unheeded. The Republican Party was glad to deploy Theodore Roosevelt’s natural charisma in its service, but it had little use for his progressive ideas.

    Another key weakness of the GOP’s 1900 campaign was that it was not actually sure who it was campaigning against.

    Obviously not the Democrats, who had no chance in hell of even approaching victory.

    The Populists seemed the clearest threat. After all, Bryan had taken 27% of the popular vote and 98 electoral votes in ’96. The Populists had not gained significantly in ’98, but who knew what the totals this year might reveal?

    The Socialists were the great bugbear. They’d won 8.5% of the popular vote (and no electoral votes, thank God) in ’96. And then they’d clawed their way past 13% in ’98. State legislatures from Pittsburgh to Denver were increasingly full of reds. Now, in the aftermath of Wilmington and Cripple Creek, who knew where it would end? Could they poll more than the Populists?

    The very idea put a chill down most spines.

    Then there was Frick’s insurgent campaign. The Republicans had expected challenges from their left in the Populists and Socialists, but they had not looked forward to a threat from the right, as Frick was now presenting. His campaign was built around skewering McKinley for the ‘impotent, quavering’ nature of his administration, incapable or unwilling to stand up to the red menace. What America needed was a mailed fist, and he could provide it.

    The result was that the Republican message was confused, haphazard, almost schizophrenic. They insisted on maintaining sound money as a part of the platform but considering the country had not seen the massive economic upswing expected as the fruits of adherence to the gold standard, this was played down compared to ’96. When attacking the Socialists, they emphasized the importance of private enterprise and constitutional republicanism to the American way of life. When battling Bryan, they tried to convince voters that America might not be in the best way, but she would be in far worse straits if the Great Commoner was allowed to implement his madcap free silver schemes. And when trying to claw defecting Republicans back from Frick, they focused on the man’s inexperience and made much hay out of his supposed dedication to the Voice over his duties as governor. Though some (usually Roosevelt) occasionally skewered him as a soulless capitalist who saw the world as something to be profited from and then discarded, the GOP simply could not unleash a truly vicious attack upon Frick as a ‘puppet of moneyed interests’ (as Roosevelt sometimes called him in public), because, after all, they feared to appear ‘soft on radicals’.

    As for Frick himself, he ran quite a smooth show. He was already famed for his cool, ineffable manner. He had maintained it even as Alexander Berkman stuck a pistol in his face. The theme of his campaign was quite simple: he was the only one who could or would save America from the rising red tide. McKinley was hopelessly inept, Bryan was an abettor of reds, and of course, Darrow was the menace itself.

    He was not a gregarious, jovial entertainer like Roosevelt, nor could he stir the heart as both Bryan and Darrow could, but listeners always noted the command with which Frick spoke. Mark Hanna would grudgingly admit, ‘when he spoke, regardless of what came out of his mouth, you read it as an order.’

    Frick was the polar opposite of Darrow in more ways than one. Darrow would never use one word where ten would do. Frick would never use one word where a frightful stare would suffice. His speeches were short and to the point, but they left his listeners convicted.

    When Roosevelt called him a butcher for his actions at Homestead eight years earlier, Frick responded only by saying, “There are a hundred corpses at Cripple Creek for every corpse at Homestead.”

    To Frick’s consternation, most of his fellow titans of industry viewed the National Party and his presidential run as a bit of irresponsible adventurism. Socialism and radicalism menaced, certainly, but for the time being most capitalists were prepared to stick it out with McKinley, and splitting the conservative vote seemed unwise. Even the LDP, in which Frick wielded considerable influence, lavished most of its donations on the Republican campaign. Frick felt slighted, but wealthy as he was, the Sultan of Steel did not need anyone to finance his campaign for him. He steamed from city to city aboard his private Pullman car, made his point, and moved on. Even his campaign posters tended to be especially succinct. One of the most popular simply presented a profile of the man, underscored with the triptych that became his signature; ‘Country. Order. Peace.’

    Frick did not want the National Party to be taken as merely a splinter of the Republicans. If he could not have the GOP’s nomination, then he would make sure his new party would never be mistaken for the one he had left behind.

    And he did not want to be seen simply as ‘the business candidate’. If he was going to win, he needed an expansive electorate.

    The NP could not simply be ‘anti-socialist’. It needed an identity.

    In an interview with the New York Times in summer 1900, Frick insisted he was not ‘anti-labor’. He explained that if he were president, he would strive to establish harmony between capital and workmen, and provide structured, possibly state-run forums through which each might advance its interests peacefully. Corporations, he called them. This prospective system he called a ‘corporate republic’.

    In fact, some of the early campaign posters Frick put out carried as their slogan, ‘for the corporate republic of capital and labor!’ These were withdrawn on the advice of Andrew Mellon, who suggested they carried an uncomfortable implication of doing away with the current republic.

    To this conciliatory end, he secured as his running mate the relatively young William Randolph Hearst, a New York Democrat and businessman known for his liberal sympathies. Hearst published the New York Journal and had supported Bryan’s candidacy in ’96. For a long time he tended towards the progressive and even pro-labor side of the Democratic Party. But the events of ’94, and especially Wilmington and Cripple Creek, had turned him fiercely against ‘radicalism’. He still professed to be a friend of the worker, but like Frick insisted that labor and capital must resolve their differences peaceably and cordially within the confines of the existing order—it could not all be upended on a whim.

    With the Democratic Party in shambles and now essentially nonexistent outside the south, Hearst only briefly wavered before accepting Frick’s offer.

    Naturally, Darrow, as the representative of the red specter Frick sought to exorcise, bore the brunt of the attacks from the King of Coke. Frick described the lawyer as ‘florid, with little besides the flowers.’

    Darrow characteristically retorted—in flowery enough language—that Frick was ‘an enemy of all the decent sentiments of mankind, stripped of all that makes men men save the thirst for jewel and precious stone, undisturbed by consideration of the world beyond the strict confines of the balance sheet, the purest incarnation of raw avarice and industrial tyranny.’

    To this barrage in particular, Frick responded, ‘as I said. Flowers. He can heap all the roses he likes upon the inhuman carnage of Chicago; it will remain so.’

    As for Darrow himself, he ran perhaps the most spectacular campaign of the year. He played up his history as an attorney for the great railroads, explaining that ‘his heart rebelled’ against ‘the injustice I for which I was compelled to marshal defense. My gorge rose at the corruption of the republic’s hallowed institutions, repurposed so that they might serve not liberty and man, but rather gold and silver. I became a high priest of Mammon, and I could stand it no more.’ The image of the former servant of capital turned a defender of labor resonated.

    Frick and Darrow both liked to conjure up the ghost of Eugene Debs. But while Frick used it to frighten, Darrow employed the specter of his one-time client to inspire.

    ‘A nobler man I never knew, briefly as I knew him’ he said before an audience at Cooper Union in New York. ‘The good people who shot Debs would have shot Lincoln. They would have shot Washington, and probably Christ himself. When it is a capital crime to plead for a living wage and a loaf of bread, you can be sure civilization is fast disappearing in this ‘land of liberty’.’

    His wit also did not hurt.

    When he was reminded by a Republican partisan that he had defended the assassin Prendergast, who had murdered the mayor of Chicago in 1893, he said merely, ‘yes, I confess, I am a lawyer.’

    Darrow enjoyed perhaps the most energetic ground-level support of any candidate, thanks to the exceptional organizational ability of the Socialist Labor Party. In St. Louis, a chorus of pretty young women, chosen for their red hair, opened his speech with a rendition of the Star-Spangled Banner, followed by the Internationale. Even a decidedly hostile reporter from the Tribune was forced to admit the strains were ‘stirring’.

    An amusing spectacle was organized in Buffalo, where Darrow, in a mock-up of a courtroom, defended labor (portrayed by an actor in the greasy overalls of an archetypical workman) against capital (portrayed by a pot-bellied actor in the suit and top hat of an archetypical bourgeois), in a trial presided over by a judge who wore a placard reading ‘the impartial state’ (and who regularly interjected on behalf of capital). The skit left the audience howling with laughter.

    The SLP published a booklet entitled simply ‘What do the Reds Want?’. The cover carried a reproduction of an anti-socialist newspaper cartoon that featured a scruffy anarchist sinking a dagger into Lady Liberty’s back. When the reader opened the cover, he found a very simple list of modest, eminently reasonable proposals.

    ‘The socialists recognize that wealth is produced by labor. They merely wish that this be recognized by society at large,’ was the first plank. Another was ‘the Socialists believe that the worker ought to be remunerated according to his share of the work. Profits mustn’t rise while wages fall or stagnate.’ Yet another initially called for ‘race equality,’ but fearing this might be taken as advocating racial mixing, in reprints was fixed to read, ‘equal dignity and right for men of all races’.

    DeLeon was very unhappy with the publication, which seemed just the sort of moderate, simpering, reformist nonsense he’d been fighting against all his life. He was outvoted by the SLP’s executive council and mollified when Ella Boor convinced him it was merely a strategic presentation of Socialist philosophy and obviously not a policy plan.

    Nevertheless, the booklet was a massive hit, reaching a circulation of over a million by election day, in the face of DeLeon’s objections.

    In fact, DeLeon was rather grumpy about the whole affair, holding fast to his insistence that political theater was no substitute for revolutionary action. He was also suspicious of the newcomer Darrow, who he called ‘a showman who has not read a word of Marx’. Darrow in fact devoured Capital not long after joining the party but nonetheless clashed with DeLeon several times on certain points of theory. Darrow was a believer in the Socialist program, including the socialization of production, and was becoming more and more sympathetic toward the idea revolution. He was simply not as hard-headed as DeLeon, and so the two men never really got along.

    The final participants in the race were the Democrats, who are only just worth mentioning. The Democratic campaign was, like just about everything the Democrats had attempted since the Red Summer, a catastrophe.

    By nominating Tillman, the Democrats ensured whatever support was left to them outside the south would crumble even further. Even many convinced white supremacists were disturbed and put off by Tillman’s violent racial hatred and open advocacy of lynching.

    ‘A lunatic,’ ex-president Cleveland despaired of his party. ‘They have nominated a damned lunatic.’

    The ticket was a bizarre one. As a sop to the Democrats that remained beyond the borders of the old Confederacy, the old northern Democrat and one-time Union officer John M. Palmer was nominated as Tillman’s running mate. The two men despised each other. Palmer was a hardline ‘sound money’ man who had announced in ’96 that he would have run on another ticket had the Democratic Party abandoned its commitment to the gold standard. Tillman had leaned towards the Populist wing of the party, before the Battle of Wilmington at least, which convinced him that the Populists were a fount of ‘negroism’. The pair fought constantly, spent as little time together as possible, and Tillman on one occasion threatened to ‘run through’ his vice president hopeful.

    Neither Bryan, nor McKinley, nor Frick, nor Darrow, gave the Democrats the time of the day, except as a punchline. McKinley, not known for his gregariousness, joked at a speech in Gary, Indiana that he ‘certainly hoped not to find [himself] conceding to Mr. Tillman in a few months’ time.’

    Frick wondered aloud if ‘Mr. Tillman has checked for the negroes and carpetbaggers under his bed tonight,’ to the laughter of his audience.

    But decrepit as the party might be on a national scale, it still maintained some power in its southern heartland, and would not give it up easily. The old party machines and ‘good old boys’ networks’ that had dominated Dixie for so long were desperate to retard the march of the Populists and the Socialists on their turf.

    The reborn Klan was deployed as a paramilitary force to menace blacks and known white Populists (or Socialists) and do worse than menace if necessary. In Montgomery, in August 1900, a unit of Klansmen engaged in a gunfight with a band of Populist farmers, resulting in six deaths. In Calhoun County, Florida, the offices of the local SLP were set alight. In response, a prominent local Klansman was beaten nearly to death on his way home from work.

    This sort of low-level political violence would soon become general throughout the country, but it became so in the south far earlier than it did anywhere else.

    Fearful of the gains that might be made at the ballot boxes by black voters, various states moved to disenfranchise their colored populations as soon as possible. Worried that the elections in fall would sweep away forever the already-shrinking Democratic majority, Democratic state senators in Louisiana attempted to ram through a hastily written constitution of dubious legality. Louisiana was one of the southern states with the strongest and fastest growing Populist-Socialist movement, much to the terror of the traditional elites. The new constitution would effectively strip the vote from 50%+ of Louisiana blacks, a critical constituency in the south for both parties.

    Though the Democrats still held a bare majority, there were enough Populists and wavering Democrats in the legislature to block its passage.

    That fall, the Louisiana Democrats were indeed thrown out of power, never to return.

    The country finally went to the polls that fateful November.

    McKinley was one of the few US presidents in the history of the republic hardly cheered by his (re)conquest of power. Total turnout was up more than 5% from 1896, but his share of the vote totals had fallen both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of total ballots cast. While he had taken 45.2% in ’96, now he received only 5,050,185 votes for a portion of 33.2%. The most immediate cause of this collapse in the Republican electorate was the defection of Henry Frick, who had taken with him most of the rapidly growing constituency whose first and foremost concern was rising ‘anarchy’. McKinley had also lost a significant portion of the labor vote he’d won in ’96, which had become disenchanted with a ‘recovery’ that by and large did not include wage laborers. In 1900 these one-time McKinleyite workers either voted SLP, Populist, or did not vote. McKinley took the presidency outright only by the narrowest margin—he won 225 electoral votes, one over the necessary majority. This was a victory hardly celebrated in the halls of the GOP.

    Bryan came in second place, much to his disappointment and that of his party. The Populist’s share of the vote also fell since ’96, though by a much smaller magnitude than that of the Republicans. In ’96, Bryan had received 27% of ballots cast. In 1900, he received 3,894,119 popular votes, for a total of 25.6%. The Populists’ core constituency, western farmers, had been mollified by the McKinley recovery. Those who voted generally did vote Populist, as the Democrats were no longer of any account, and they mostly were not inclined to vote Republican or Socialist. But many simply did not vote, not oppressed by the economic malaise that had weighed so heavy on them in the last cycle. Bryan also received votes from many workers not radical enough to cast a ballot for Darrow, and from many southern blacks. But the Populists did not see the huge gains for which they had hoped. Their ascent had sputtered out. The Populists’ share of electoral votes also fell by nearly half, coming in at 54. Interestingly, they got these from different states than they had in ’96. The electors of Georgia, Louisiana, and North Carolina were lost to the Democrats and went to Bryan. So did Idaho and Montana.

    In third place by share of popular vote came the SLP, who were thrilled by the numbers. The SLP vote had more than doubled since ’96, soaring from 8.3% to 21.3%, with 3,240,028 votes. The great majority of this increase came from evermore disenchanted workers in the industrial belt and in the west, whose unions were ground down by force, and whose wages stubbornly refused to rise. However, a not insignificant number of former liberal Republicans and some ex-Populist farmers also cast their votes for Darrow. The Socialists took 50 electoral votes, coming in just behind the Populists. Despite the overwhelming majority of their numerical support coming from the industrial belts, their electoral votes primarily came from the west, thanks to the lower populations of states past the Mississippi, and thus greater impact of SLP organizers on individual voters; the electors of Oregon, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado went for the SLP. So, to the amazement of many, did those of Florida, by a bare 3,272 votes. Their only great success in the electoral college sourced from the east came from that growing stronghold of the SLP, Pennsylvania, which granted them by a slim 9,832 votes the 32 electors that made up more than half of their total.

    Then there was Frick. Frick made perhaps the most spectacular gains, considering he was head of a party that had not existed months before. He took 1,840,580 votes, for a total of 12.1%. He also received an amazing 81 electoral votes, outstripping both Bryan and Darrow, despite losing out to them in the popular vote. These came mostly from Illinois and Missouri, two states especially riven by labor violence. He also took the electoral votes of California, Texas, New Jersey, and Delaware. Most of these he won by bare majorities of less than 20,000, with one or another of his rivals nipping at his heels. To a jubilant crowd Frick announced, ‘we have brushed victory with our fingertips. Next time we shall seize it.’ The great majority of Frick’s support of course, came from Republicans who agreed with his line that McKinley was far too soft on radicals. In terms of social categorization, these were overwhelmingly middle-class voters who felt that not only their property, but even their lives might very well be endangered by rising labor militancy. Shopkeepers, lawyers, civil servants, other professional men, and middling farmers were his core constituents, with a leavening of industrialists.

    In the years since, Frick has gone down as the implacable enemy of the worker. There is of course, good cause for the characterization. But the fact is that a not-insignificant amount of Frick’s support came from certain working-class constituencies. Primarily, these ‘Frick workers’ were from New England, a region whose laboring stratum the SLP would never truly capture. These workers were also disproportionately skilled laborers, many of who felt alienated by the ‘industrial unionism’ of the SLP, which they feared would drag all wage-earners down to the level of the most common, unskilled ‘working plug’. These were the sorts who would have been comfortable with the old craft unions and were discomforted by their decline in the face of the STLA. Workers who voted Frick were variously called class-traitors, scabs, scum, or blacklegs. But vote for him they did.

    Then there were the tragic Democrats. Tillman won 1,095,221 votes total, an astonishing fall from the more than five and a half million Cleveland had taken only two elections ago in 1892. This netted him 37 electoral votes, which he did by managing to hang on to four traditional strongholds: Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, and of course, South Carolina.

    Upon receiving the returns, would-be vice president Palmer was supposed to have said, ‘we ought to just close up shop,’ to which Tillman responded that he ought to close up his mouth.

    McKinley clung to the Executive Mansion, but there was an air of foreboding over his inaugural address that had not been present four years earlier. Instead of promising peace or prosperity, he swore to ‘staunch the country’s dreadful wounds.’

    Most were less than convinced.

    1901 came rolling in.

    ________

    US Presidential Election of 1900

    1900AltElection.jpeg
     
    Last edited:
    The Congressional Elections of 1900
  • The congressional elections of 1900 were overshadowed by the thrilling presidential contest, but they presented a victory for the new heterodox movements, and a further disintegration of the hitherto firmly established two-party system.

    In the House, the Socialists added 21 seats to the 34 they’d won in ’98, bringing their total to 54. Colorado, with its two representatives, became the first state to send a delegation to Washington composed entirely of Socialists. They also elected two from Louisiana, one from Florida, and one from Georgia. Indeed, gains were being made in the south. In Pennsylvania, they expanded their seven representatives to thirteen, coming just shy of a majority of the delegation. They also won one from Washington, two from Nebraska, and three from Missouri.

    Most of these were poached from the Populists—however, the latter were benefitting greatly from the collapse of the Democratic Party, and so there was still not so much occasion for hostility between them and the SLP. Their own total rose from 70 to 89. This included six of nine North Carolinian representatives, and eight out of 11 Georgians. There were also three from Louisiana, and two each from Alabama and Mississippi.

    The Republicans witnessed the worrying fall of their own majority to a very near plurality of 171. These were mostly lost to the Socialists or the Populists. But there was a new challenger on the scene.

    Frick’s National Party, formed as it was only a few months before the election, had little time to prepare any candidates for congressional contests. Nevertheless, a number of galvanized anti-socialists eagerly joined the ranks of the party and stood for election. A fairly impressive 8 representatives managed to make it to office, four from Pennsylvania, three from California, and one from New York. A small presence, but a foreboding one. The Nationalists had their first taste of state power.

    As for the Democrats, they dropped to 24, controlling outright only the delegations now of Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, and Arkansas.

    So, as it stood when the 55th Congress was seated, there were 171 Republicans, 89 Populists, 54 Socialists, 24 Democrats, 8 Nationalists, and 15 Independents or members of smaller parties.

    It was the most divided the House of Representatives had been in a very long time.

    There were great changes in the Senate, as well.

    The 54th Congress had hosted 60 Republicans, for a solid majority. There were also 16 Democrats, 13 Populists, and 1 stubborn Free Silver Republican from Wyoming.

    In 1900, the Populists rose to 25 seats. The Republicans fell to 51 seats, still maintaining their majority, though a slimmer one. The Democrats sank to 6 senators, fattening primarily the Populists with their loss.

    Most importantly, in 1900 the Socialists sent their first ever representative to the Senate: none other than Pennsylvania’s James Maurer.

    When he entered the Senate chamber for the first time on 4 May 1901, he found few but the Populists and a small smattering of (quickly dwindling) liberal-minded Republicans would so much as shake his hand.
     
    Last edited:
    INTERLUDE: The Resurrection of the Ku Klux Klan
  • Excerpt from The Republic of Blades and Bullets: Political and Personal Violence in the Late United States, by Randolph Roth
    Belknap Publishing Collective, 2002

    The Battle of Wilmington ‘frightened the south as only John Brown’s raid had done,’ as W.E.B Du Bois would later put it.

    To many, it seemed a calculated strike at the foundations of the carefully structured white supremacist system that undergirded everything in Dixie. Like Harpers Ferry half a century earlier, it conjured up dreadful images of insurrection, heads on pikes, black rabble wielding sickles and pistols, bodies heaped up in the streets.

    John Williams of Mississippi infamously promised that, ‘nigger rule may have fixed itself on North Carolina, but it shall not come a step further southward.’

    It was a popular sentiment.

    In two respects, Wilmington was worse than Brown’s raid had been. Most obviously, unlike that fateful misadventure, the Fusionists had succeeded in Wilmington. The Democrat uprising had been put down and the survival of the ‘negro government’ assured. Might it not be a signal to similarly restless would-be revolutionaries across the south?

    And yet there was an aspect that was even more chilling. Though southern conservatives might fulminate about ‘negro rule’ and ‘black anarchy,’ deeply disturbing was the reality that white men had taken part in the fray on the same side as black men.

    And not a small handful of radicals, but a broad cross-section of Wilmington’s working classes.

    To many southern men, particularly in the more conservative states, it was an utterly alien mindset that had animated the Wilmington Fusionists.

    “How southern white men can bear arms alongside negroes and against southern white men, I do not know,” one Arkansas farmer said.

    Determined that such a thing should never come to pass in their own homes, many southern states resolved to root out any inkling of the contagion where it could be found.

    In early 1897, South Carolina passed a statute with overwhelming majority support in the legislature criminalizing the SLP within that state’s borders. Another bit of legislation outlawed ‘outrageous combinations’ and South Carolina thereby proscribed unions, already threatened as they were in the rest of the country.

    Louisiana managed to pass similar if milder laws before the disappearance of its Democratic majority in 1902, especially directed towards the disenfranchisement and suppression of the desperately poor black population in the Mississippi River Valley, who it was feared would be naturally susceptible to the ‘bacillus of revolution.’ Police presence in suspect counties was beefed up, and farmers were encouraged to keep their ears to the mutterings of their sharecroppers, and duly report any ‘red chattering’ they overheard.

    All that was not enough.

    Laws and police were all well and good, but that was not how the white men of the south had guarded their cherished ‘freedom’ in days gone by.

    What was needed was a force that would terrorize the blacks into submission once more and do the same for any white foolhardy enough to challenge the sacred color line.

    The Redshirts had been discredited by their ignominious defeat in Wilmington.

    So, when southern white supremacist searched for a new and unblemished symbol, they peered further back into history.

    This was not the first time Dixie had been assaulted by alien invaders seeking to dismantle all that was good and dear, and to stir up black against white. Then it had been the soldiers of the federal army under the stars and stripes.

    Now it was ‘European anarchists’ under the red banner.

    In the bloody days after Appomattox, the men of the vanquished Confederacy had donned hoods and shouldered rifles to safeguard civilization and white supremacy by any means necessary.

    Times had changed, but those means need not.

    And so, the Ku Klux Klan came out of its tomb.

    A few scattered militia and gun clubs calling themselves ‘the Clansmen’ or ‘the Knights’ sprang up across the south in the weeks and months following Wilmington. But the Klan was not truly reborn until the summer of 1899, when James K. Vardaman, recently a Mississippi state representative, and known by the well-merited sobriquet of ‘the Great White Chief,’ formally constituted ‘the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan’ in Biloxi, with thirty-two members besides himself.

    Vardaman was a fierce and devoted racist, even by the standards of the south. He openly sanctioned lynch law and would go on to say that “if every black must be hanged to keep Mississippi from turning red, then it will be done.”

    The Klan exploded across the south thereafter.

    By late 1903, it boasted nearly 400,000 members across the country, nearly all of them in the lower states. The Klan’s official charter pledged all members to ‘the defense of civilization, order, peace, and the Heaven-ordained white supremacy that underlays all of these.’

    The charter also swore an adherence to ‘peaceful and honorable means in the pursuance of our goals.’ But of course, much emphasis was put on the ‘honorable’ as opposed to the ‘peaceful.’ And there was little that could not be counted as ‘honorable’ if it was directed against blacks or reds.

    The first death attributable to Vardaman’s Klan was that of William Jackson, a black Socialist from Madison County, Mississippi. Jackson was young, either 19 or 21 by conflicting sources, and had been converted to socialism in the aftermath of Wilmington. His insistent agitation among his fellow black farmworkers proved a thorn in the side of the farmers that employed him, and local whites in general. After several stern warnings by figures ranging from the local sheriff to other black workers to ‘cut the nonsense,’ it was decided firmer action was needed.

    On 18 November 1899, a gang of five hooded Klansmen broke into the small shack where Jackson lived with his common law wife. She remembered one of the men saying only, “William Jackson, we charge you with treason against the state of Mississippi, find you guilty, and pass a sentence of death,” before shooting the stunned young socialist dead. No one was ever brought to trial or even arrested for the murder.

    Soon, such actions became commonplace.

    Of the 6,000 or so lynching victims in the United States between 1877 and 1918, a staggering 41% died in the bloody years between 1898 and 1908, overwhelmingly in the south.

    The Klan was organized generally into county chapters, sometimes with more than one chapter in an especially populous county, or more than one county per chapter in sparsely peopled regions. The chapters could number anywhere from 10 to 10,000 men. Though all theoretically reported to Vardaman as the ‘Grand Wizard’ (the title General Forrest had used when he commanded the original Klan) of the Klan National Congress, in reality the KKK was very loosely federated. Chapters varied in membership, commitment, and discipline. Some cells were described as ‘terrifying, fierce, with the organization and ability of soldiers.’ Others were little more than glorified drinking clubs that gathered weekly to complain about blacks and the travails of daily life.

    Most of what the Klan did was not violent. Not immediately, at least. They organized lectures and distributed literature concerning the inferiority of the black race, and regaling readers with the horrors of Chicago, the Paris Commune, and St. Domingue, promising their repetition here in the American southland should ‘rebellious negroes’ and ‘red incendiaries’ go unchallenged.

    There was no need to kill where intimidation would do, and very often waking up to find one’s house surrounded by masked Klansmen was enough to scare a Socialist or a Populist out of his convictions.

    Like their Reconstruction-era forbears, the Klan would often organize ‘night-rides’ in country regions. They charged through the hills in full regalia, bearing torches and rifles, after the fashion of avenging spirits.

    To many northerners, the Klan became a figure of fun, yet another instance of their southern brethren’s single-minded fixation on the civil war.

    But to southern blacks and their allies, the Klan was no laughing matter.

    For while the Klansmen might disdain violence where they deemed it unnecessary, very often they deemed it necessary, such as in the cases of Bill Jacksons.

    The SLP offices in Vicksburg were burned to the ground in October of 1901. No one was ever charged, and they were never rebuilt.

    Four black sharecroppers were hanged in Shreveport, Louisiana that same year. They were accused of the murder of the farmer that had employed them, a murder which was supposed to have been the signal to inaugurate a ‘black anarchist commune.’ No one was arrested.

    Despite the archetypical Klansman’s inevitable dress of a stark white robe and conical hood, there was never any standardization of uniform. Brown, grey, and even blue robes were sometimes worn, though white was preferred both as a symbol of racial purity, and of opposition to the red and the black alike. Men generally carried pistols, sometimes even rifles or old sabers.

    So attired, Klansmen would go on parade through the streets, moving in eerie silence under torchlight, as they did in Columbia, South Carolina on Christmas Day, 1900. These ‘peaceful’ nighttime marches were meant to intimidate, and they worked wonderfully.

    Perhaps most critical to the Klan’s mission was its class character. Though Vardaman was no wretched 'poor white', and his early lieutenants were disproportionately well to do, the Klan was soon drawing recruits from every strata of white southern society, welcoming the very poorest white laborer and the men of grand estates alike.

    It was important, as Vardaman specifically stated, to prevent what had happened in North Carolina—a tactical alliance of blacks and whites—at all costs. As such, there was no room for class snobbery or division among the men defending the white southern order. Racial solidarity must be the beginning and end of it.

    Though white sharecroppers, farmers, and laborers who voted socialist were not nonexistent, they were still very uncommon in the deep south. The biggest threat, as the Klan saw it, was the Populist Party. Pursuant to its part in the Wilmington drama, Bryan’s party was commonly seen as a sort of stalking horse for the reds. Most Populist politicians in the south still fully supported segregation and the strict maintenance of the color line, but this was not enough anymore.

    The Populist Party had, since 1894 and especially 1896, exploded in popularity among poor southern whites. In Georgia and North Carolina, it had almost entirely displaced the Democrats among that demographic. It threatened to do the same in Florida and Louisiana, and its position elsewhere was strong as well.

    If the Klan and its associated white supremacist allies had let the Populists be, conceded some of their begged for reforms, they could have driven a wedge between it and the SLP. Thus, they would have successfully locked the Socialists and black voters (increasingly coming to be identified with each other in the south) out of power for a long time to come.

    But as it happened, they cast their net too wide, and included the increasingly powerful Populist Party in their list of the ‘foes of white supremacy.’ In doing so, they alienated many whites who would not have much cared if Socialists were run out of town and ‘insolent negroes’ beaten or lynched.

    With Populist politicians and known Populist voters on the receiving end of the same aggression, the Klan found it had made itself a powerful and resilient enemy. Perceiving themselves (rightly) as under siege, southern Populists also became increasingly friendly to the SLP, not eager to drive off any allies, even small and radical ones.

    The years between 1899 and 1904 were rough. The country was still reeling from the horrors of Wilmington and Cripple Creek, along with the political shakeup caused by the entrance of both the SLP and now Henry Frick into national politics.

    In the south, this tension spilled over into generalized political violence earlier than it did elsewhere.

    By mid-1902, bands of armed Populist ‘Minutemen’ styling themselves after the heroes of the American Revolution had sprung up across the south to protect themselves from the ravages of the Klan, alongside the SLP's armed 'Spartacus Columns.' They were not above employing ‘preemptive’ terror themselves.

    In early 1903, in Tallahassee, Florida, Minutemen firebombed the home of a local Klan leader, killing him along with his wife and one of his sons.

    A few weeks later in Vernon Parish, Louisiana, two white farmworkers known to be Populist voters were beaten and finally stabbed to death by suspected Klansmen. It was never ascertained with any certainty whether it had been a political murder or the results of a personal quarrel. Nevertheless, when the bodies were discovered the next morning, a fierce gun battle ensued between Klansmen and Minutemen, leaving three dead.

    The Socialists, even more odious in the eyes of reactionary southerners than the Populists, naturally did not have to ask themselves which side they were on. In the few southern SLP strongholds, such as New Orleans, Atlanta, and a number of other cities, their Spartacist militants fought alongside the Minutemen. In areas where it was weaker, they counted on Populist protection. It was usually granted, at least tacitly.

    Thanks in no small part to the Klan itself, an alliance took shape that was much like Wilmington writ large.

    It became much harder for the Klan to portray its enemies as nothing but ‘negroes and white traitors,’ when such a large cross-section of southern whites could be counted among them. Likewise, rather than the Populists finding themselves marginalized by their association with the Socialists, to many the Socialists were made more palatable by their compact with the Populists. Certainly, southern membership grew in those early years.

    Peter Clark celebrated ‘the dissolution of the color line among the workingmen of the south.’ It was a wild exaggeration. Populist and Socialist meetings across Dixie were invariably divided by race. In New Orleans there were two strictly separate Socialist ‘workingman’s club.’ One white, one colored. So it was in any southern town or city with sufficient Socialist membership to warrant a club in the first place.

    Even so, there was a hint of truth to what he said, and the Daily People editorial in which that line appeared was deemed too incendiary for publication in the south.

    Rather than the invincible cudgel of white supremacy and Democratic rule that the Klan had imagined itself to be, it just as often as not now found itself on the defensive.

    Vardaman was largely successful in his dream of a cross-class white coalition, and low-class whites appeared in the ranks about in proportion to their part in general society. But the Klan’s spokesmen and most prominent figures were generally sophisticated, well-heeled men of the middling classes. This provided much fodder for the left, which tarred the KKK as a tool of class war disguised as one of race war.

    “Lift up the white hood and you will find only green,” became a favorite canard of southern Populists and Socialists.

    The New York Times ran a 1903 headline reading, ‘THE WAR FOR THE POOR WHITE MEN OF THE SOUTH.’

    It was a fair description.

    For the black men of the south, of course, the choice was clear.

    They were the most firmly Socialist constituency in the country by 1903, and those who did not vote red voted Populist (especially the ever less-common black smallholder), though a smaller but sizable minority was still firmly loyal to the Party of Lincoln.

    As ever, the left in the south had to pull off its delicate balancing act so as to maintain both black and white supporters in force. The Populist-Socialist alliance provided a unique opportunity.

    Populist leaders were eager to maintain black support, especially in states where blacks had not been disenfranchised, like Louisiana and Alabama. But they feared accusations of fomenting ‘black anarchy.’

    The Socialists were not eager to be seen as a ‘black party’, either. But their reputation was inevitably more radical than that of their allies, regardless. And so, they had less to lose in terms of public perception.

    Thus, when Populists wanted to rally black voters, or make promises to the black community they had no intention of keeping, they often delegated the tasks to local Socialists, so they might be more easily disclaimed if necessary.

    During the 1902 midterms, state Populist leader B.W Bailey dispatched Minutemen of both races to escort black voters to the polls in especially hostile parishes. However, the men were instructed to wear red armbands and identify themselves as Spartacists when questioned.

    In the end, though the Klan certainly built up a powerful base of support, they failed to unify the white men of the south into a solid bloc as it had been in days past. One northern visitor was amused to hear a Populist farmer’s young son in Alabama describe his rifle as “for shooting ducks and Klansmen.”

    Shootings, arson, lynching, and tit for tat violence in all its forms raged on in the south for years, but it would not boil over until 1903.

    The depression hit the region hard and left countless thousands out of work. Countless sharecroppers lost everything, and common laborers found their wages screwed ever further downwards. Murmurings of revolt and anarchy were in the air, and the propertied people of Dixie were nearly as nervous and edgy as their social inferiors.

    It was in this climate that the Ellis Murders took place.

    Mary Ellis was the 18-year-old sister of 20-year-old Tom Ellis, an Atlanta bricklayer and Socialist. The siblings lived together with their aged mother, Sally. They were a white family.

    In early March of 1903, Tom got into a political dispute with a number of coworkers known to be Klansmen. It was, as was reported, the latest of many such fights, but evidently was the last straw. On the 16th of that month, three drunken Klansmen appeared at the Ellis house. By their own account, they intended only to ‘scare’ Tom. But when they broke down the door, he fired on them with a revolver. Enraged, once they’d gotten hold of the young man, they cut his throat.

    Mary attempted to save her brother. The intruders, worked up on alcohol and bloodlust, knifed her savagely in the gut and fled, leaving her to bleed out.

    The reaction was swift and angry.

    This time, the Klan had not killed a black man, nor had they killed some rough-edged Populist farmer or thuggish red sailor. In fact, some marveled that they had chosen the most sympathetic victim possible. Mary was politically uninvolved, young, pretty, and most importantly, a white girl.

    There was a great outpouring of sympathy for the two slain youths and for old Sally Ellis, who had lost both her children. This time, the Klan could not count on the tacit protection of the authorities. The Atlanta chapter did not attempt to defend the culprits. They were swiftly handed over to the police, arrested, charged, and tried. Convictions were never in doubt, and the tearful testimony of Mrs. Ellis won not only three convictions but also three death sentences.

    The affair also won the first official condemnation of the Klan from a prominent southern political figure. Georgia was the only state in the south with a Populist governor: Thomas E. Watson, an old national ally of Bryan’s. Watson had been moving to the left ever since ’94 and was even suspected by some of being a closet socialist (though he certainly would have denied this). Nevertheless, he was elected Georgia’s governor in 1900 by the votes of the state’s farmers.

    In response to the murders, Watson gave a charged speech in which he denounced Klansmen as ‘mad dogs,’ and ‘hateful masked cowards.’

    The speech was, naturally, immensely popular with black Georgians, and also with a large number of white Georgians. It produced a reaction beyond the state borders, and even beyond the south.

    Vardaman was not mad enough to defend the murder itself, but staunchly defended his organization, insisting that “all the good, honorable men gathered under the banner of the Ku Klux Klan ought not to suffer condemnation for the outrages committed by a handful of scoundrels.”

    Mississippi’s own governor, Anselm McLaurin, felt compelled to offer a counterweight to Watson’s speech, and pronounced Klansmen as “good, solid citizens,” but admitted that, like any society, “there are always a number of ruffians who use the standing of their upright fellows as cover for misdeed and depravity.”

    The whole drama received considerable coverage in the northern papers as well and did not help ease a sectional reconciliation that, even 35 years after the end of the Civil War, was not proceeding uninterrupted.

    The New York Times called it a ‘foul crime.’ The SLP’s Daily People proclaimed the Ellis siblings to be martyrs, ‘whose hearts’ blood has dyed our flag’s every fold,’ as the young Socialist activist Upton Sinclair put it, obliquely quoting the increasingly popular English labor anthem ‘the Red Flag’.

    It brought national attention down on not only this case, but the increasing frequency and brutality of southern violence in general. There was even some brief noise among congressional Republicans to the effect of suppressing the new Klan using the Red Act, but little came of it.

    North Carolina, ruled by Populists and Republicans, did criminalize the Klan within state borders, though this had not been one of its strongholds anyhow.

    Even Frick’s Voice, despite the victims of the Ellis murders’ Socialist allegiances, denounced the crime as ‘barbarism, and a vile echo of Reconstruction.’

    The response of the Klan and its sympathizers to this national opprobrium was to dig in their heels. It closed ranks and became increasingly rigid as an organization. Public rallies and parades declined. Regimentation was strengthened, with a new array of mandatory salutes and drills. Less ‘serious’ chapters were ordered to shape up and expelled if they did not.

    Violent action was not scaled back, but in some locales even intensified, as Klansmen seemed determined to prove they were not ‘cowed’ by popular condemnation.

    Lynching and gunfights continued to burn across the south, worsened by the deepening depression. Now that the eyes of the country were on this bloodshed, the turbulence of Dixie was magnified on a national level and added to the overall American anxiety of the period.

    The south suffered the worst unemployment rates in the country during this time (with the exception of certain regions of the industrial belt), rising to ~35% by early 1904 in the six states of the ‘deep south’. By that same year, the homicide rate in the same region had risen to nearly 16/100,000 as unemployed youths wandered the streets in search of trouble, Klansmen, socialists, and Populists clashed, and domestic murders spiked.

    Property crimes also became more common—sometimes it was simple robbery or acts of outraged vandalism at perceived injustices, or the settling of personal scores. Sometimes it was a political act—the firing of a labor union’s offices or a Klansman’s home.

    New Orleans counted 46 cases of politically motivated property destruction between summer 1903 and summer 1904, 18 of them arson.

    Turmoil only increased as the 1904 election neared.

    The Klan itself was split over which candidate to endorse. Darrow was obviously out of the question. The Democrats were dead. A few considered supporting the Republican-Populist ticket, if only to stop the reds. But Roosevelt's less than stringent view on racial segregation soured many, as did Bryan’s recent history as a ‘red dupe.’ Vardaman himself briefly considered running on a ‘southern ticket,’ but dismissed the idea as foolhardy.

    That left Frick.

    Not many in the Klan were enthusiastic about the King of Coke. He was a northerner, and of fairly recent immigrant background to boot. He was not especially racist for a man of his time and place, perhaps even slightly less so. But he was rabidly antisocialist, and socialism and ‘negroism’ were quick dovetailing for many in the south.

    Tentative feelers were put out to Frick by the Klan’s national congress—he rejected any official endorsement, and so none was ever offered. But many chapters and individual Klansmen ‘on the ground’ took it on themselves to campaign for the National Party.

    A banner was briefly strung up outside the state house in Tupelo, Mississippi reading, ‘Frick and Freedom!’

    Even as the Klan pushed for a German-Yankee, the ranks of the southern Socialists grew near exponentially.

    The Populist Party had played a part in familiarizing southerners with the SLP and stripped the Socialists of much of their ‘foreign’ air. But now, as misery and poverty weighed heavier than ever on the country, the Populists were increasingly seen as insufficiently principled or radical. Appeals to smallholding farmers and old dreams of a yeoman republic held increasingly less meaning to newly landless sharecroppers or poor immigrant laborers in the port cities of the south. These men drifted instead over to the Socialists.

    Where the Socialists grew, the Klan grew, and the same was true in reverse.

    The Populist Party began something of a disintegration. Those with an inclination towards forceful action joined the ranks of the SLP. Some of those who could not stomach a radical program withdrew from politics entirely, and a smaller minority even went over to the Klan.

    As the polarization worsened, so did the violence.

    By November 1904, some regions of the south had neared something resembling low-intensity guerrilla warfare.

    Blacks were increasingly terrorized and killed, even those who had nothing to do with the Socialists. Likewise, wealthy or even simply middling people were murdered and robbed with astonishing frequency, in what was often lewdly as described as ‘socialization,’ a term the SLP's ‘the Way Forward’ had introduced into the common lexicon. Often as not, this was simply the work of common criminals legitimized by a thin veneer of revolutionary conviction.

    Vardaman publicly declared that the goal of the Klan was ‘to keep the red out and the black down,’ and this they did with aplomb.

    Even where no black people were concerned, the struggles were often perceived through the prism of race war.

    The sons of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ farmers donned white hoods or the cross of the Klan and marched into the south’s coastal cities to do battles with Socialist workers, the sons of ‘southern European rabble’. In New Orleans, three Italian Socialists were drowned at the wharf amid mocking shouts of “swim back to Sicily!”

    The left proved almost equal in ferocity—a number of Klansman farmers had their fields and farmhouses set alight, sometimes with themselves and their families inside.

    Blacks and immigrants might have had an easy enough choice, but it was less so for white Americans. Often, the fault lines ran through family, as white farmers and laborers were forced to decide whether class or race was more important to them.

    In one case, a white Atlanta stevedore called his Socialist brother ‘nothing but a god-damned nigger in white skin.’ His brother shot back that he was a ‘Klan toadie and a dog,’ and then stabbed him to death.

    By one count, there were 652 ‘political murders’ in the United States between 1902 and 1905. Nearly half of these were committed in the south, vastly out of proportion to its portion of the country’s overall population.

    It was the bloodiest period in the south’s history since Reconstruction.
     
    Last edited:
    1901
  • There are years where nothing happens, and weeks where years happen.”
    - Vladimir Lenin​


    Events of 1901

    January
    • 1: A group of smug individuals hold a celebration of the new century in New York City, pointing out to all who will listen that the 20th century does not actually begin with 1900, but with 1901.
    • 8: A brief uprising in Manila is put down by US troops with 52 'insurgents' dead to six American soldiers.
    February
    • 8: Continental Security formed through a merger of the Pinkerton Detective Agency, the Pennsylvania Coal and Iron Police, and various smaller private security firms. It exists in close partnership and often virtual identity with the League for the Defense of Property (which itself is increasingly known among its foes by the ominous appellation, 'the Cartel.')
    • 23: US Steel finally becomes the only practical producer of steel in the United States.
    • 27: Bill Haywood arrives in Colombia, after a year in Mexico.
    March
    • 4: McKinley gives his second inaugural address. He narrowly misses being struck by lightning. It is not generally viewed as a good omen.
    • 11: Oil is struck in Mexico.
    • 20: Wages in the United States fall 0.3% from the previous year.
    • 31: STLA numbers climb past 100,000 for the first time.
    April
    • 6: US troop deployments to the Philippines rise to 4,000, and casualties reach 400 killed in fighting.
      • Kaiser Wilhelm authorizes continued aid to Moro rebels in the face of further American diplomatic protests.
    • 17: First meager German funds also reach dissident Mexican groups, including the anarchist Magón brothers.
    • 20: After the conclusion of his Siberian exile, Vladimir Ulyanov returns to Petersburg. He is arrested again within a few weeks, and consequently flees the country for Switzerland. It is around this time he first begins using the nom de guerre ‘Lenin’.
    May
    • 1: May Day procession in Chicago featuring over 10,000 marchers and a speech by Clarence Darrow and Max Vogt among others goes ahead without violence.
    • 5: Vice President Roosevelt writes letter to McKinley urging the establishment of the long-shelved Industrial Commission to combat corruption and ‘outrageous monopoly’ in the American economy. McKinley politely but firmly declines to do so.
    • 13: Daniel DeLeon pens The Industrial Union elaborating both on unionism as a revolutionary tactic and outlining a very bare bones proposal for the functioning of a post-revolutionary ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’. Darrow and a few moderate voices in the party express concern over the potentially ‘incendiary’ effects of such a publication. DeLeon ignores them.
    • 19: Copper magnate F. Augustus Heinze of Union Copper, after years of struggle with Standard Oil puppet firm Anaconda Copper for the mines of Montana, sues Anaconda for violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
    June
    • 15: Grand Duchess Anastasia Romanova, fourth daughter of the Tsar Nicholas II and his wife Alexandra, is born at Tsarskoe Selo, near St. Petersburg.
    • 27: Standard Oil’s control of the oil market rises to 96%
    • 29: a federal court finds in favor of Anaconda Copper – Heinze resolves to take it to the Supreme Court.
    July
    • 5: Klansmen bomb Populist Party offices in Gulf Shores, Alabama, killing four. Three men are arrested for the action, but all are released and never brought to trial.
    • 9: Governor Frick sponsors the opening of a new wing of the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
    • 14: Cornelius Vanderbilt III of New York Central Railroad prepares to finalize his takeover of long-time rival Pennsylvania Railroad, backed by a number of New York banking houses.
    • 22: Mexican dictator Porfirio Diaz grants charters to both Standard Oil and Royal Dutch Shell, hoping to play the two oil giants off of one another.
    • 28: first ‘Spartacus Column’ formed by STLA-affiliated Ironworkers’ Union in Pennsylvania—consists of thirty union workers armed with privately acquired weapons, and detailed to guard trade union offices, party representatives, and if necessary, strikers.
    August
    • 3: Klan rally in Natchez, Mississippi, draws nearly 25,000.
    • 18: Tsar Nicholas, concerned that his wife will never bear a son, abolishes the Pauline Laws over much opposition. The new ruling allows for the autocrat’s eldest daughter to assume the throne upon his death, should a male heir fail to appear.
    • -22: Oil struck in Spindletop, Texas. Standard Oil rapidly moves in and seizes the lion’s share of the claim.
    September
    • 7: In Heinze v. Anaconda Copper, Supreme Court of the United States finds in favor of Anaconda Copper, ruling that the Sherman Anti-Trust Act is an unconstitutional restriction on ‘commerce’, and thus overturning it. The final decision is 7-1, with Justice Harlan the only dissenter.
    • c.15: Frick’s National Party passes the 30,000-member threshold.
    • 17: Some minor anti-war demonstrations break out in New York, Cincinnati, Los Angeles, and a number of other cities as American casualties in Philippines soar past 1,000.
    • 21: United Mine Workers of America finally affiliates officially with the STLA, by a narrow vote of its executive committee.
    • 30: UMW coal miners in eastern Pennsylvania go out on strike for increased wages.
    October
    • 5: Pennsylvanian miners occupy mines and neighboring towns.
    • 8: George Baer, acting in his capacity as representative of the Mine Owners’ Association, calls in 200 Continental Security men to guard mines and escort scab labor.
    • 11: Clash between CS agents and Spartacus guardsmen in Scranton results in dozens of injuries but no death.
    • 13: Frick calls out the militia, again.
    • 21: Mining stocks take a severe hit.
    • 25: VP Roosevelt sends a letter to President McKinley strongly suggesting a government-arbitrated conciliation between labor and capital in the ongoing dispute. McKinley considers the proposal but is ultimately persuaded to reject it.
    • 28: Red flag briefly raised over Scranton city hall – it is torn down by state militia within the night.
    November
    • 3: Executive Mansion flooded with petitions urging the breaking of the strike, now that the cold months are here, and coal is desperately needed throughout the country.
    • 7: President McKinley announces that the US Army will be used to run the mines.
    • 16: First federal troops arrive in Eastern Pennsylvania to comply with the order – they meet some resistance, and 21 severe injuries (19 miners and two soldiers) result, though no deaths are recorded. After this, the strikers are quickly dispersed, and the soldiers put to work in the mines.
    • 28: Swedish immigrant Joel Hägglund—the future Joe Hill—arrives in the United States and begins a life as an itinerant laborer.
    December
    • 3: Secretary of the Treasury Gage pens a brief report warning of serious storms on the economic horizon, including reduced investment as a result of labor troubles, stagnating wages, and concurrently ominous bubbles in industries such as railroads and oil. It is largely ignored.
    • 4: Mining stocks begin to creep upwards again.
    • 7: As the country is transfixed by the Anthracite strike, financier and industrialist J.P Morgan is ambushed outside his home and shot to death by the Polish anarchist Leon Czolgsosz.
    • 8: News of Morgan's death triggers an immediate panic on Wall Street. The Dow-Jones Industrial Average plummets nearly forty points in a single day.
    • 11: Bank runs begin.
    • 16: Knickerbocker Trust, NBNA, and a variety of smaller banks go under as the financial crash exposes the underlying weaknesses of a seemingly solid economy.
    • 17: Daniel DeLeon delivers a lengthy and tortuous address in congress on the trouble in Scranton and then justifies Morgan's assassination.
    • 19: Leon Czolgosz is indicted in a district court for the murder of John Pierpont Morgan.
      • Fellow anarchist Emma Goldman, the one-time girlfriend of Henry Frick’s would-be assassin, Alexander Berkman, declares Czolgosz’s act ‘the wrath of the working people’.
    • 24: The country, including probably most workers, is generally horrified by Morgan's assassination. But in many of the more radical coal and steel working districts of Pennsylvania – including Homestead—slogans like ‘long live Leon!’ or ‘First Morgan and then the rest’ are daubed onto walls and signposts.
    • 30: Stocks plummet further, registering a nearly 30% drop from their pre-crash high.
    • 31; The New York Times' front page headlines read. "GENERAL CRISIS"
     
    Last edited:
    The Crash of 1902
  • By the morning of 2 January 1902, it was becoming clear that the crisis could not be stopped.

    A little less than a month earlier, on 7 December, Polish-American anarchist Leon Czolgosz was finalizing a long-laid plan.

    'Propaganda of the deed' was a 19th century anarchist neologism which referred to individual action so spectacular it would awaken the masses and perhaps even spark revolution. In practice, 'propaganda of the deed' referred to the assassinations of monarchs, prime ministers, presidents, or other prominent reactionaries. In 1881, Tsar Alexander II of Russia fell victim to a revolutionary bomb. In 1894, the French president Carnot was knifed to death by an Italian anarchist.

    Now, in 1901, fired by the turmoil in Scranton, Czolgosz decided he would strike at the uncrowned monarch of the American financial world: John Pierpont Morgan.

    Morgan was in that year one of the richest men on the planet. More than that, he was especially renowned on Wall Street for his guiding role in the national economy and for the stability his financial expertise provided in the often volatile world of the stock market. By 1901, Morgan owned commanding stakes in countless American corporations, from the railroads, to the banks, to Frick's own US Steel.

    Early on 7 December, as the country's eyes were fixed on Pennsylvania, Czolgosz armed himself with an .32 caliber revolver and headed to Morgan's residence on New York City's Madison Avenue. The financier was not home, so he waited. When Morgan returned that evening, the assassin was waiting for him. Czolgsoz stepped out from the shadows and shouted, "Morgan!" By Czolgosz's own account, Morgan turned and "got a look of shock." Czoglosz fired the revolver three times. The first two bullets struck Morgan in the chest, and the third in the shoulder.

    Czolgosz was apprehended by a crowd of passerby, and only just saved from being torn apart by the intervention of a few New York patrolmen.

    Morgan was dead long before he arrived at the hospital.

    The next morning, by which time all had heard of Morgan's death, the NYSE opened in an utter panic. The certainty Morgan had personally provided the American markets, with his vast personal fortune and economic acumen, was gone. Shareholders sold everything they could, desperate to avoid ruination. Prices plummeted. Wild rumors of further assassinations, or bombings, or even that this was the start of a long organized anarchist uprising, spurred the panic.

    As the Dow-Jones Industrial Average cratered, losing nearly 30% of its value by January, it became clear that the stock market had been dangerously overvalued. The panic soon spread from Wall Street to the general public.

    Loans were recalled as fears of a national recession loomed. A bank run on 11-14 December turned fears into reality, and only four days later two major American banking houses, Knickerbocker Trust along with the National Bank of North America, were forced to shutter their doors.

    The panic quickly became nationwide, as bank after bank was mobbed by desperate Americans, terrified their every earthly possession was at risk.

    On 19 December, stocks took the worst dive since ’92. The efforts of Carnegie, Frick, and men like them to shore up the faltering economy with their personal fortunes fell flat.

    On 4 January, McKinley held an emergency meeting with his cabinet, where Treasurer Gage expressed his opinion that the situation was ‘beyond hope.’

    In truth, the crash was a long time coming.

    The McKinley recovery had been largely illusory. The violent unrest endemic since ’94 had shaken confidence in the economy on all levels, reduced investment and spending all around. The stagnant or falling wages of industrial proletarians coupled with ever-rising production resulted in a surfeit of commodities that would ‘rot on the shelves’ so to speak. An unwarranted confidence in the promises of McKinley had spurred an epidemic of speculation and borrowing among western and southern farmers—borrowings and investments they would now never make good upon.

    The shockwaves of the failures reverberated rapidly through the faltering American economy. Thousands of tracts of farmland and many more homes were repossessed by desperate country banks who in turn were compelled to fork over the loot to their own urban creditors.

    Unemployment skyrocketed as long-term works shut down, factories ceased to glow, and fields lay fallow.

    At the end of 1902, joblessness hovered at 17.8%, and seemed likely to climb higher by the end of 1903. Perhaps much higher.

    Wages tumbled, falling by nearly 5%.

    The Crash of ‘02 had come and left devastation in its wake.
     
    Last edited:
    Top