One of the Nonpartisan League's spokesmen, United States Senator Ladd of North Dakota, advocates (a) better methods of marketing and distributing farm produce, by means of coöperation between farmers and consumers; (b) higher ethics in the labelling of farm produce; (c) government loans to farmers by the government at the rates granted to banks; (d) laws to discourage tenancy and favorable to ownership of farms and home building; (e) laws making profiteering a penal offense; (f) laws to prevent speculating in the essential commodities of life; (g) laws extending benefits of Federal Land Banks more fully to farmers. READING LIST S. J. Buck, The Agrarian Crusade (Chronicles of America, XXXV); F. E. Haynes, Third Party Movements Since the Civil War; A. E. Paine, The Granger Movement in Illinois (University of Illinois Studies I, No. 8); E. N. Barr "The Populist Uprising" in W. E. Connelley, Standard History of Kansas; E. B. Andrews, The United States in Our Own Time, 281–284; C. A. Beard, Contemporary American History, Chap. 6; Paxson, Chaps. 2, 11, 13, and 14; Recent History, Chap. 17; Fox, Map Studies, No. 25. QUERY AND DISCUSSION Compare the modern farmer with the farmer of the seventies as to his educational advantages, isolation, influence in public life. Is he better fitted to legislate for his interest? What is an "Agricultural Bloc"? What is “cheap money”? Why is it desired by a debtor class? Denounced by a creditor class? What good laws are now on our statute books which were advocated by Grangers or Populists and denounced at the time as radical? Are new political ideas judged so much on their absolute merits as by the character and reputation of those who advocate them? Has the same argument been raised in connection with the Eighteenth Amendment as was raised in connection with the Fourteenth (p. 428)? May a third party have a more powerful influence than merely to be used by a party out of power to defeat its rival in power? CHAPTER XI THE CLEVELAND ERA The era lying between the Democratic victory under Cleveland in 1884 and the advent of Theodore Roosevelt in 1901 in many senses marks a distinct age in the development of our Republic. National attention was absorbed intensely in these days in problems relating to the economic development of the country, particularly to tariff, currency, and labor questions, while other distinctly home affairs, as the Indian problem and civil service reform, were, likewise, often under the spotlight of public scrutiny. How distinctly this Cleveland Era was one in which things primarily American interested us as a nation is seen when we compare it with the Rooseveltian Age which followed, bringing numerous strange international questions before the people in addition to many curiously new national questions such as trusts and conservation. Our present chapter includes, then, the two terms of Grover Cleveland (1885-1889, 1893-1897), the intervening presidency of Benjamin Harrison (1889–1893), and that of William McKinley (1897-1901). We call it the Cleveland Era because of the dominating character of that leader whose personality, as time goes on, commands greater and greater admiration because of its sterling Americanism. Under this heading we review the story of civil service reform, the Indian problem, of labor reform, and the tariff and currency battles. Section 51. Democratic Victory and Defeat THE victory of Cleveland over Blaine in the presidential election of 1884 was something more than a mere choice between two political leaders. It was an illustration of that typical thing in American political life, the willingness of the public to break with the past, to cast off shackles which had become timeworn, even if many called them "time-honored." The Republican régime in the "Age of Miracles" was strong The meaning in many points; otherwise commercial development could not have been the marvel that it It had rebuked the rascality of bad men of Blaine's defeat was. who had gotten into offices of influence. It had stopped, for the most part, illegal profiteering in public lands. It had GROVER CLEVELAND opposed illegal speculation in. and wrecking of, railroads. Yet the rise of the Mugwump element, heretofore mentioned, showed that many people were dissatisfied-enough people, in fact, to bring about Cleveland's election. As Professor Muzzey of Columbia University well says, dents who have interpreted 'leading' their party to mean educating their party." The control of the Senate by the Republicans prevented any party legislation; but, like an Andrew Jackson, Cleveland struck vigorous blows for reform in many lines, winning for himself a sturdy fear from Republicans and, finally, dislike from his own party. As time has passed men have realized that his opposition to high tariffs, to the Tenure-of-Office Act (now abolished), to pensions, to land grabbing, to strikes which tied up transportation systems, and his efforts for a stronger Pan-Americanism, were prompted by a high type of patriotism and a manly display of independence. The main problem of Cleveland's day was similar to that which faced Andrew Jackson, the dangerously increasing sur plus in the national treasury. A table will present to the eye quickly the enormous growth of this surplus: YEAR 1870 1885 SURPLUS 10,000,000 145,000,000 446,000,000 Rival theories on the surplus Cleveland believed that it was wrong to have a great amount of money withdrawn from circulation and “tied up," as the saying is, in the government's vaults. His plan to solve this problem was to cut off one source of supply, namely, high tariffs. It was poor policy to use this surplus to pay off our national debt. A public debt is of value to a prosperous nation especially if, as in the present instance, the bonds which secure it command a premium, because such bonds offer one of the safest forms of investment the people of a nation can have. The Republicans pointed to our protective tariffs as the cause of our prosperity, and rather than reduce the tariff, favored repealing all internal taxes on liquors, tobacco, etc. With typical independence Cleveland made bold to put the tariff question straight up to the people of the nation in the presidential election of 1888. The candidate nominated by the Republicans to oppose Cleveland was General Benjamin Harrison of Indiana, sturdy grandson of the Harrison who had beaten Van Buren in 1840. On the main question before the issue in 1888 nation, tariff reduction, Cleveland carried the Tariff the country with him, his popular vote being 98,000 greater than that given General Harrison. Local issues and political "trading," however, lost important states for Cleveland and made Harrison victor in the electoral college by 65 votes. The famous Democratic organization in New York City, Tammany Hall, led by David B. Hill, was disloyal to Cleveland. The Sackville It was accused of "trading" Democratic votes West incident for Harrison for Republican votes for the Demo cratic state ticket. This gave Harrison New York's electoral vote by a slight margin. A letter written by Lord Sackville West, British ambassador to the United States, stated that Cleveland's election would be more satisfactory to Great BritIain than would Harrison's. This made it seem that the Democratic free trade policy was most satisfactory to Great Britain and influenced, in a measure, the vote cast for General Harrison, Indiana's favorite son. First revision of the tariff Harrison was inaugurated March 4, 1889. As a result of this election both Houses of Congress now had Republican majorities. A large surplus in the treasury made it possible to grant over a billion dollars in pensions to Civil War veterans under the title of a Dependent Pension Act. The first real act revising the tariff enacted since the Civil War was now passed which will be hundred millions in 1890; it was reduced in the two follow ing years to practically nothing. This was "viewed with alarm" by the opposition par ty as the election of 1892 approached. Many feared that the nation was on the verge of a panic. The swerving of the western farmer from the Republican banner to that of Populism, elsewhere described, was also a factor in the election of 1892. Cleveland was nominated again to oppose Harrison; the Tam |