The Alliance Party and the Minnesota Legislature of 1891

MR. CHRISLOCK IS associatc professor of history in Augsburg College, Minneapolis. He is especially interested in the politics of protest in Minnesota during the 1890s. The Alliance Party and the MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE of 1891 CARL H. CHRISLOCK IN THE GENERATION following the during the first decades of statehood, this CivU War, Minnesota politics were as was not evident in state elections, for the turbulent as frontier politics are usually habit of casting decisive majorities for supposed to be. The troublesome issues the Republicans became well established faced by a new state and the aggressive in the years after 1860. A Democrat occa personalities who assumed political leader sionally was elected to Congress, but from ship conspired to make it so. The principal 1860 through 1888 the Republicans won arenas of political conflict during this pe every contest for state office and held over riod were the biennial Republican state whelming control in every legislature. conventions and the state legislatures. Both The election of 1890 marked a sharp were notoriously unpredictable. For exam break in this pattern. When the returns ple, Alexander Ramsey's immense prestige were tabulated, it was clear that the period did not save his "dynasty" when it came of unchallenged Republican supremacy had under attack in the Republican convention ended — at least temporarily. By an ex of 1873, and in 1875 the legislature rejected tremely thin margin, the Republicans man his bid for a third term in the United States aged to re-elect Governor William R. Mer Senate. In 1883 Senator Wifliam Windom riam and other state officials with one was defeated for re-election, and his suc exception. The post of state auditor went cessor, Dwight M. Sabin, was permitted to Adolph Biermann, who enjoyed the com to serve only a single term. In 1888 it was bined support of the Democratic and generally agreed that Governor Andrew R. Farmers' Alliance parties. The outcome of McGifl had given the state a creditable this contest carried significant implications; administration, but he was denied renomi- it suggested what might be possible if per nation by his party .^ manent Democratic-Alliance fusion could vythough Minnesota politics were fluid be effected. As it was Governor Merriam could hardly claim electoral endorsement 'See Harlan P. Hall, Observations; Reing More or of his administration. His plurality over Less a History of Political Contests in Minnesota from Judge Thomas Wilson, the Democratic can 181f9 to 1901,, 121-154. 196-201, 206-214 (St. Paul, 1904). didate, was fewer than twentv-five hundred September 1957 297 votes, and he received less than forty per with the Grange and also with the Green cent of the total ballots cast.' back party, another expression of agricul If the state returns were discouraging to tural discontent in the 1870s and 1880s. Afl Republicans, the Congressional results were three, in varying degrees, called for an disheartening. Although the incumbent del inflationary monetary policy and the invoca egation had been solidly Republican, in the tion of state police power and federal regu 1890 election only one district, the Second, latory authority to control freight rates, was salvaged by the Grand Old Party. In marketing practices, and money lending. this southwestern Minnesota area, John The 1890 platform of the Alliance party in Lind was returned to the House by a mar cluded afl these demands.* gin of less than five hundred votes.^ The Throughout the 1880s the Minnesota First, Third, and Fourth districts, which at Farmers" Alliance had eschewed third-party that time included the Twin Cities as well activity. Instead it had operated as a pres as the southeastern and the south central sure group within the two-party system. counties, were captured by the Democrats. For a time this strategy appeared well con In the Fifth District — roughly all of Min ceived. In response to Afliance pressure, the nesota north of Swift County — Kittel Hal legislature of 1885 established a three-man verson, the Alliance candidate, was the railroad and warehouse commission as a victor. "strong" regulatory body, enacted several That agricultural discontent was chiefly laws defining and prohibiting discrimina responsible for the 1890 electoral upset is tory railroad practices, and set up a system indicated by the surprising showing of the of grain inspection at terminal elevators. In new Alliance party, the farmer's self-pro 1886 the Republican party wrote into its claimed spokesman. Although it was not platform a series of reform demands pre yet four months old at election time, the sented jointly by the Alliance and the Alliance party's candidate for governor, Knights of Labor. In the fall elections, a Sidney M. Owen, polled 58,513 votes, near substantial number of legislative candi ly a fourth of the total cast for the office. dates committed to Alliance objectives In addition to electing a third-party Con were named.^ gressman, Afliance voters contributed to Thus Alliance hopes had never been higher the victories of two of the three successful than at the opening of the legislative ses Democrats in the Congressional races. Ap sion of 1887. Yet within a few weeks these proximately a third of the members of the hopes came crashing to earth. The powerful new legislature were Alliance party men — bipartisan (but predominantly Republican) enough to prevent the organization of that reform bloc in the legislature led by Igna body by either the Democrats or the Re tius Donnelly split into two embattled fac- publicans. ' For voting returns discussed in this and succeed ing paragraphs, see Minnesota Legislative Manual, THE SUDDEN APPEARANCE of the 1891, p. 554-571, 574-576. Alliance party in the campaign of 1890 ''Lind is, of course, better known to Minnesota marked a stage, not a beginning, in the his political history as a Democrat. His party allegiance shifted from Republicanism in 1896. tory of Minnesota agrarian protest politics. * See Minneapolis Journal, July 17, 1890. Two works In the 1870s the Patrons of Husbandry, dealing with agrarian protest politics in the Midwest better known as the Grangers, held the cen are John D. Hicks, The Populist Revolt: A History of the Farmers' Alliance and the People's Party (Min ter of the agrarian stage. Grange vitality neapolis, 1931), and Russel B. Nye, Midwestern Pro declined, but within a very few years the gressive Politics (East Lansing, 1951). complex of organizations making up the ^ A detailed discussion by Donald F. Warner of Farmers' Alliance movement had come into the Alliance activities outlined here and in succeeding paragraphs may be found in "Prelude to Populism," in being. The Afliance had much in common Minnesota History, 32:130-140 (September, 1951). 298 MINNESOTA History HOLLER mill at Stephen, 1890 tions, and only a small part of the Alliance 1890, when the Minnesota Farmers' Alli program was enacted into law. For the next ance again assembled for its annual conven two years the Farmers' Alliance was so tion, the organization was formidable. weakened by war between these factions But the problem of unity was stifl an that its influence with Republican leaders urgent one. The 1889 arrangement of elect shrank to the vanishing point. As a result, ing a compromise candidate to the presi some members of the Alliance felt that the dency and employing Donnelly as state organization should sponsor the creation of lecturer was renewed by the 1890 conven a new third party. tion, much to the chagrin of Donnelly's friends. With great reluctance he accepted IN 1889 the basis was laid for a Farmers' the decision, but during the summer of Afliance renaissance. At its annual state 1890 he made it clear that he would not convention, which met in March, a truce — again tolerate what he considered a denial though necessarily a tenuous one — was of his rightful due. negotiated between the factions, and plans The 1890 convention was also obliged to were made for an ambitious membership face the issue of future Farmers' Alliance drive. Ignatius Donnelly made a substan political strategy. Expressions on the floor tial contribution to both these projects. For and numerous resolutions from Alliance the time being he set aside his own ambi locals indicated that independent political tion to be president of the state Afliance action commanded stronger support than and agreed to the selection of a compromise ever before. Donnelly, however, opposed candidate for this post. Since Donnelly's the immediate creation of a state-wide aspiration to lead the movement was the third party; he proposed instead a concen principal issue at stake between the fac trated effort to elect friendly legislators and tions, his forbearance was essential for in local officials. Other Alliance leaders were ternal unity. As Alliance state lecturer, thought to favor fusion with the Demo Donnelly also lent his great forensic talents crats, or at least exploratory moves in that to the organizational drive. His success was direction. In the face of divided opinion, striking; in 1889 and 1890 Afliance locals the convention did not definitively settle multiplied at a phenomenal rate. By March, the question of a third party. Instead the September 1957 the same reluctance manifested at the March convention, Donnelly's supporters accepted Owen and the other candidates on the state ticket. TO A CONSIDERABLE EXTENT Owen and the Alliance held the initiative during the 1890 campaign. In meeting the chal lenge of the new party, Democrats and Republicans alike emphasized their agree ment with basic Alliance contentions about the plight of the farmer, the "wickedness" of monopolies, and the urgent necessity to legislate economic imbalances out of ex istence. Although subsequent campaigns were to be marked by Republican and Democratic efforts to capitalize on alleged third-party extremism, this was not the case in 1890.

Load more