The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-09-22
WHO SHOULD THE ALLIANCE
SUPPORT FOR SPEAKER

SUPPORT FOR SPEAKER
AS the time approaches for the meet
ing of the 50 Congress, when Speaker
is to be elected to preside over the
House of Representatives, our Con
gressmen should carefully study the
situation and be prepared at that time
to vote for some man whose election
to that important office will not mean
a setback or rebuke to the principles
of the Farmers Alliance or to those
measures which it is 50 earnestly advO-
eating all over the land to-day. If it
is right for a man to advocate these
measures in the Alliance hall it is also
right for him to advocate them in the
halls of Congress. If a man, as a mem
Der of Congress, is opposed 10 the de
mandsO of the Alliance, 1T IS only reason
able to suppose, unless he informs us
| differently, that as an officer in that
body he will still be opposed to them,
the only difference being that it will be
within his power, as a presiding officer,
to iniure these demands to a greater
| degree than he could as a mere mem
Der.
1t is very necessary, if the Alliance
hopes to accomplish anything through
our next Congress, that it should work
for a man for Speaker who favOrs its
demands, and who will appoint COM
mittees that will at least make some
kind of a report on our bills which are
referred to them, so that they may
come before Congress and be discussed.
We can, by this discussion, if no other
good comes of it, learn who are for us,
and who are against us, and remember
them in future nominating conventions.
There are several announced candidates
for Speaker already, but the contest
is rapidly narrowing down to two
Rodger Q. Mills, Of Texas, and Charles
Z. Crisp, of Georgia, men whom no one
will deny are competent in every way
to fill the office satisfactorily, so far as
the Democratic party IS concerned,
But what does the Alliance have to say
on the subject?
R. Q. Mills, Of Texas, enjoys the dis
tinctiOn of being the very first of a
number of prominent politicians that
pub icly attempted to crush the Sub
Treasury plan. He has offered no sub
stitute for it, and has reported no
change of feeling in regard to it.
Can any Alliance Congressman who
favors the Sub-Treasury plan, under
these circumstances. consistently vote
for ROdger 9. Mills!
Charles f. Crisp, of Georgia, draws
most of his Importance and strength
in this contest from the fact that he
gave Tom Reed, of Maine, a well-de
served verbal chaStiSement in the last
Congress which won him the approval
Of his party everywhere. That was
we'll done, but how does he stand on
the Sub-Treasury plan? He opens not
his mouth about it, and his supporters
are pleading that he be elected without
being made to commit himself on this
question.
AlIiancemen, are you satisfied with
Charles +. Crisp? Do you hope for a
champion after election, in a man who
before election, is too timid Ito put the
matter mildly to say how he stands'On
your most important measured Are
you willing to risk such a man? If 50.
vote for c.. T. Crisp.
Our Congressman may claim that
since they were elected as Democrats.
they are hOnOr-bCUnd to support the
caucus nominee of the Democratic
party, 1t is true that they were elected
as Democrats, but that ~isnOtall. They
were elected as Alliance Democrats.
If they had not expressed themselves
as favOring the Alliance demands, they
would not, and could not, have secured
their nominations, much less election.
This being the case, they owe their
allegiance both to the Democratic party
and to the Alliance, and can do their
duty toward both organizations by
voting for an Alliance Democrat for
Speaker. Mills and Crisp are not the
only Democrats in next Congress
capable of filling the Speakers chair.
Why then should our representatives
vote for either of them?
But we are told that all the Alliance
Congressman, by uniting, cannot elect
a Speaker of their own number, then
why not vote for Crisp or Mills? True,
the Alliancemen alone cannot elect a
Speaker, but they can and should be
consistent, and there is no consistency
whatever in voting for men whom they
know at the time are against us.
In conclusion, lest in should be
thought the writer wishes to disorganize
the Democratic party, he will state that
he has always been and is still a Demo
crat, but he is an Alliance Democrat.
He sees nothing in the demands of the
Alliance that does not harmonic with
the principles of the Democratic party,
hence in opposing Democrats who are
enemies to the Alliance, he opposes
them as individuals and not the party
to which they belong. S. H. B.
r n TRTTAT~ IT -VTT ~~rT-r-----