The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1898-04-20

- al oAu AOC I0e O0mOCr6LlC party
that polled the vote Of 1896. It was his
reform views, his confidence-inspiring
speeches, his personal magnetism, his
natural leadership that effected results.
Debs. Altgeld. Watson. Pingree, Pen
meyer. Harvey, Donnelly, Norton. Barker
and score Of others might be named
who have following OF admiring and
warmly devoted friends outside Of their
own state. scattered from sea to sea.
Some OF these leaders are Democrats.
some are Republicans. some are Social
say that on account Of party name either
one Of these leaders has a following
less devoted than the others. Many Of
these leaders have belonged to two or
more Of these parties at different times
and when they, for what they deemed
sufficient cause, made the change (their
enemies called it a fop) their personal
following still remained loyal. Recog-
nizing these basic truths of human nat
ture, we suggested that the speediest
way to get union OF reform
forces was first to get these prominent
leaders to unite. It is the fact that am
bilious leaders are pulling in different
directions that splits the reform forces
and causes them to take sides and be-
come partisans, and partisan Popullst
is entitled to no more consideration than
q partisan Democrat or partisan Pro-
hibitionist or Single Taxer. He is par
tisan all the same.
We are surprised to find in another
column a clipping from the Southern
Mercury in which that staunch Populist,
Milton Park, let loose his partisanship
by asking why all these men and every
other pretended reformer will not "aliga
themselves with the Peoples party
Every Democrat is asking Populists why
not align with the Democrats.
In 1860 the Prohibitionist party was
dead The anti-slavery forces were
scattered through several different po-
litical parties exactly as the reform,
anti-plutocracy forces of to-day are scat
tered. And what was the result? Did
the anti-slavery people in the Wing. the
Democratic and the other parties all
"align themselves with the Prohibition
ists," as Mr.. Park would contend they
should do?
Nothing Of the kind. Men OF 1860
were partisan as now and a few states
men saw an escape from the letters OF
partisanship In the formation OF the
Republican party, the New Deal OF 1850.
In the face OF this historical prece-
dent Mr.. Park says: "The fimsy, sense
less, baseless argument that such par
ty would draw rapidly to its ranks the
honest, true and intelligent reformers
from all the various factions and or
CARNATIONS which oppose the methods
and measures Of the two old parties Is
too patent to merit criticism" and that
III the Peoples party cannot succeed no
new party which can enlist It's follow
ers can" Partisanship, partisanship!
We hope Brother Park will be moved
to reconsider the following questions:
Isn't it fact that Bryan would have q
big following regardless OF the party
name he went under provided only that
he stood for reform7
Isn't the same true OF each OF the
other reformers herein named? II these
leaders came together under new name
on a common platform for radical re-
form and held any considerable portion
of their present following. wouldn't 1t
be a pretty healthy nucleus around which
to rally for successf
Would not such an organization with
such leaders and the resultant pull on
all the parties for increase OF votes
stand a better chance Of success than a
party Of down-trodden. broken-sp1rited,
poverty-stricken serfs, business failures
and honest dupes who too often constl-
tute the great majority Of the so-called
rank and file voters of the true. earnest
and radical reform party. Get the great
reform leaders together and will not
the rank and file still be loyal to their
beloved and respected leaders, loyal to
their principles and loyal to themselves?
n. A. T.