ance.

116

A deaf and blind institute was established at Talladega, an extra judge was added to the state supreme court, much effort, without success, was made to call a constitutional convention, and many bills showing dissatisfaction with the work of the Railroad Commission were considered.117

One of the delicate duties of the legislature was to select a successor to U. S. Senator James L. Pugh, who desired to succeed himself. The outcome of the election might depend upon the strength of the Alliance. Pugh had by his outspokenness made many enemies during his ten years in the Senate. Many also thought him lazy and they desired a younger and more active man. Governor Seay, a young man, wanted it; so did Ex-Governor Thomas H. Watts, and Kolb had announced for Pugh's seat before Jones' inaugural. All over the state his cry of "fraud and robbery" had been heralded and some said let him go to Washington.118 The two houses held a joint caucus on the night of Nov. 18, 1890. In the senate were 11 Alliancemen and in the house 69, a total of 80 out of a membership of 133. In a joint meeting with all Alliance members backing Kolb, the result would have been in his favor. But not so. On the first caucus ballot the vote stood 42 for Pugh, 42 for Kolb, 32 for Seay, and 11 for Watts. On the 29th ballot secrecy of the ballot was abolished. The vote wavered but the caucus dissolved without a choice. In a few days each house in its own chamber balloted again for a Senator and finally re-elected Pugh, who received the votes of several Alliancemen, among whom, after Kolb and Watts had withdrawn, were S. M. Adams and N. N. Clements, speaker of the house. Watts' forces joined in for Pugh and he was elected by a handsome majority over Seay. Pugh praised the Alliance but begged it not to disrupt the white man's party.1 119 He, like the Alliance, stood for more and cheaper money and for tariff reform.

116 Age-Herald, Feb. 9, 11, 12, 1891; Miller, Alabama, p. 286. 117 Advertiser, May 20, 26, 1891; Advertiser, Oct. 3, 1890; Advertiser, Feb. 19, 1891; Miller, Alabama, p. 286. The railroads incurred hostility by objecting to the special tax for paying the support of the commission.

118 Age-Herald, Dec. 3, 1890; Age-Herald, Nov. 19, 1890; DuBose, Article No. 99, in Jones, V, p. 70.

119 DuBose, Article No. 99, in Jones, V, p. 70; Age-Herald, Dec. 3, 1890; J. C. DuBose, Alabama, pp. 305-352; Age-Herald, Oct. 1, 1890; Advertiser, Jan. 11, 1891; Advertiser, Jan. 19, 1891.

An ugly contest arose between the legislature and the governor over the disposition of the state's portion of the Hatch Fund for the Agricultural Experiment Stations. The $15,000 had since 1887 been used by the station at Auburn, but the legislature of 1890 passed an act introduced by Senator J. H. Minge of Marengo county to apportion $9,000 to the station at Auburn and $2,000 each to the stations at Uniontown, Athens and Abbeville. Governor Jones believing the law out of harmony with the purpose of Congress in establishing this trust fund, and believing it unwise to dissipate the funds, vetoed the bill. He had been warned by Alabama's U. S. Senators that such action might cause Congress to withdraw the fund. Jones was hanged and burned in effigy at two places in the state.120 At Athens his likeness was strung to a telegraph wire and burned, amid the jeers of the mob. Much excitement prevailed. The senate upon second thought met and by large majority ratified the governor's action.121

120 Kolb had been burned in effigy at Greensboro in the 1890 campaign. (Age-Herald, Feb. 22, 1891.)

121 Age-Herald, Feb. 22, 1891; DuBose, Article No. 100 in Jones IV, p. 42; Advertiser, Sept. 17, 1911, Advertiser, March 1, 1892; DuBose, Article No. 100, in Jones, V, p. 70.

CHAPTER V

THE POPULIST PARTY EMERGES

A SPLIT DEMOCRACY, 1892-1896.

One of the local papers of the state, almost a year before the election of August, 1892, prophesied exactly in these words: "Next year is going to be the all-firedest campaign that this country has ever witnessed. You fellows that can't stand the pressure had better have your baggage checked through to another clime." The Hartselle Enquirer rejoined: "Yes, brother, you had better see that your ticket bears the straight Democratic stamp.'

The convention fight of 1890 was a hectic one but that of 1892 was to eclipse it in fierceness of personal and political attacks. For the first time since 1861 the majority party of the state really divided. This time it was not a question of state rights but a fight primarily on the part of Commissioner Kolb aided by the Alliance, with some non-Alliancemen, against the more conservative forces the socalled machine group-led by Governor Jones.2 It was the campaign of 1892 that was completely to rend the Democratic party. Yet it will be observed that each faction professed to recognize and proclaim its fidelity to that party. Although there were two state conventions and two distinct tickets each professing to be Democratic, a majority of the Alliance group did not openly acknowledge its adherence to the Populist party. The disgruntled, bolting wing, led by Captain Kolb in 1892 and again in 1894, and by Captain Goodwyn in 1896, called themselves Jeffersonian Democrats, and not Populists. They were, however, by the conservative Democrats and their press branded as "Populites" and they did, in two national elections support the Populist ticket. It will be seen that a distinct People's party was organized in 1892 and led by J. C. Manning, but this faction never gained any worthwhile headway as a middle-ofthe-road group. The two groups always voted together,

1 See News, Oct. 19, 1891, quoting the Marion Standard. 2Brown, Alabama, p. 331; See Age-Herald, Nov. 26, 1890. 3News, June 23, 1892. For a study of Populism in other states see R. C. Miller, "Background of Populism in Kansas", in Miss. Valley Hist. Review, March, 1925.

and there was no popular distinction between them. They were all Populists.

The campaign of 1892 had virtually opened the moment Kolb was defeated in the convention of 1890. Like a violent disease the virus grew more deadly from the moment of its inception and with a two-year momentum the vitriolic year of 1890 was to be scarcely a drop in the bucket compared to that of 1892,—an epochal year in American political annals. All national, state and county officers were to be voted for that year, the number of candidates in Alabama alone being estimated at as high as 6,000.4

Although dissatisfied at Kolb's advice, his followers voted for Jones in August, 1890, but from then on Kolb and his supporters waged a constant battle for the office he had lost in the convention of 1890. This convention had appointed an Executive Committee of 22 persons, -15 Jones and 7 Kolb supporters, with H. C. Tompkins, a Jones man, as chairman. Thus from the outset there existed "A Discontented State Committee" which by precedent would have much to do with the next election, for it was the function of this committee to formulate in an extra legal way rules and policies for the county primaries and conventions.

The year 1891 was one of unrest in Alabama as elsewhere, industry being at low ebb, with much noise over the concentration of wealth by the few at the expense of the masses. Conditions seemed to grow worse year by year, and the soil was well prepared for a political bombshell. In Jefferson county, for example, much dissatisfaction existed among a large wage class and there early in 1891 Kolb supporters, led by Altman and Taliaferro, lawyers, organized the county committee. A young lawyer, Thomas M. Owen, later conspicuous in state history, who was at the time chairman of the Jefferson county Executive Committee, called a meeting in August 1891 which agreed to elect twenty-six delegates to the state convention, on the prorate plan, and not as a unit for either Kolb or Jones. The number of delegates allotted to each would thus depend upon the comparative popular support each received in the county primary. The pro

4Age-Herald, April 26 1891. This estimate included an average of three candidates for each office from Congressman down through beat delegates.

5 DuBose, Article No. 104, in Age-Herald, Nov. 9, 1913. 6 DuBose, Article No. 104, in Age-Herald, Nov. 9, 1913.

rate plan agreed upon for Jefferson county and used in some of the other counties was viewed with much disfavor by many of the old-line Democrats, who urged uniformity of rules. There was rising a strong demand for primary elections rather than conventions where only the political boss and wire puller dominated. The Montgomery Journals opposed the change to a primary and was dubbed "The Billious Blue Bourbon." The Alliance as an organization did not advocate the primary election," although the Kolb faction generally charged that by fraud and trickery they had been counted out at the last convention but would not allow such to happen again.10

Jones was given no time or chance to show that his administration merited his re-election, for Kolb and his backers, strongly urged on by a majority of the Alliancemen, crying fraud and robbery, were determined that Kolb should be made governor in 1892. Plans were definitely launched immediately after the convention of 1890 to make Jones' re-nomination impossible.11 In spite of the claim that both candidates belonged to the same political party; and in spite of the well established twoterm precedent which in itself should have allowed Jones a second term without opposition, Kolb, instead of waiting till 1894, when he might have been invincible as a candidate, announced himself, July 21, 1891, as a candidate on the Democratic ticket, his only excuse being that he had been cheated out of the nomination in 1890.12 From the start Kolb entered the campaign on the offensive, displaying himself as a martyr and a victim of the organized machine. His opponents said he assiduously preyed upon the sympathy and prejudices of the agricultural masses.13 Despite every variety of scheme to de

News, Nov. 3, 1891; Age-Herald, Nov. 29, 1891.

8Age-Herald, June 6, 18, 1891; Age-Herald, July 11, 1891; News, July 22, 1891.

9News, June 21, 1891.

10 Age-Herald, June 5, 1891; Age-Herald, July 11, 1891; News, Dec. 14, 1891, July 22, 1891. One reason suggested by the Democrats as to why the Alliance party did not come out boldly for the primary plan was that their support was chiefly rural, and the small rural beat under the convention plan was allowed the same vote as the larger city beat, hence relatively the convention plan would give the Alliance faction greater strength.

11 Advertiser, May 10, 1892; Birmingham News, Sept. 20, 1891; Advertiser, July 2, 1891; News, Nov. 17, 1891.

12News, Oct. 27, 1891; Advertiser, July 29, 1891; News, Jan. 5, 1892, also Dec. 8, 1891, Nov. 15, 1891.

18 News, Sept. 20, 1891; Advertiser, Jan. 20, 1891; See also