Populists Told: Stay Off the Street Corners or Get Arrested
With a promised debate opponent a no-show, Seattle's Fourth Ward Populists argued among themselves about unity, the Pullman strike and whether corner speeches win votes or just fill the police blotter.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The Fourth Ward Populist Club advertised a debate last evening between W. T. Hellerstad and F. H. Hease on "Republicanism vs. Populism," but Mr. Hease failed to put in an appearance, and so the assemblage was regaled with speeches by Robert H. Lindsay, J. W. Young, Joseph Z. Sexton, W. G. Larkin and W. T. Hellerstad.
Mr. Lindsay said the party lacked leaders because it was a party in which each man thought for himself. He urged unity, harmony and concessions to each other, so that a good ticket might be put in the field. The only thing that would prevent a Populist victory was a lack of unity and harmony. He also urged each individual Populist so to conduct himself as to command the respect of the public at large.
Mr. Lindsay strenuously advised against the holding of Populist meetings on the street corners. It was the intention of the powers that be to enforce the ordinance which prohibits the blocking of sidewalks, and it would look bad to see it chronicled in the papers each morning that Populists had been arrested. The street meetings, in his judgment, accomplished no good.
J. W. Young thought the best work could be done by propaganda. He also advised making converts by private conversation and argument. He especially favored the proselyting of Republicans, and said one Republican was worth two Democrats, because the former was the stronger party.
Mr. Sexton said the People's party had capital and a powerful press opposed to it. He declared that the statement that the Populist party was on the wane was an error, as the facts were that it was increasing in strength.
W. G. Larkin favored the dissemination of Populist literature. He paid his respects to Cleveland for insisting on the repeal of the Sherman law, for trying to seat Queen Liliuokalani on the Hawaiian throne, for ratifying the treaty with Russia whereby political offenders can be extradited, for calling out the United States troops during the recent strike and for the passage of the Havermeyer tariff bill.
The allusion to the troops caused Mr. Lindsay to rise to his feet. He said that no governor had called on Cleveland to call out the United States troops, and yet we had the spectacle of a Democratic president invading states' rights. He did not regret that troops had been called out to preserve order. He strongly denounced those who plied the torch, or destroyed property, or tried to kill the men who took their places. He held that neither the people nor the Populists wanted civil war, and they must redress their grievances at the ballot box.
W. T. Hellerstad said he left Europe because he was not free there, to find a more burdensome slavery in the United States. He claimed that the United States courts during the recent strikes had even abolished trial by jury.
“"It would look bad to see it chronicled in the papers each morning that Populists had been arrested. The street meetings, in his judgment, accomplished no good."”
In the summer of 1894, with the Pullman boycott still fresh and federal troops in the rail yards, Seattle's third-party activists were fighting the same internal argument every insurgency has: purity or coalition, the street or the ballot. Their worry that a sidewalk speech would produce a morning mugshot anticipates the modern calculus over protest tactics and public order.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.