The Plymouth tribune. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1901-1911, 1901-11-28
WHO KILLED POPULISM
Passing Of the Party that SwaI-
lowed Democracy Under
Bryan's Skyrocket Leadership
The Air Full of Ominous
Signs in the Northwest.

GRAND FORKS, N. D., Nov. %
is populism dead? Has the So
called reform" organization,
which came into existence with
the PRONUNCIATION of the Ocala
platform, and which apparently
absorbed the 'unterrified democ.
racy," at Chicago in 1896, ceased
to be a factor in national politics?
The foregoing questions haye
been agitated at every political
gathering which has been held
in the northwest during the past
twelve months. 1t is significant
that wherever these questions
have been discussed in that Sec
tion-once a stronghold of popu-
lism-the answers have been al
most invariably in the affirmative
even many of the men who at
one time strenuously champion
ed the pronouncements of the
Ocala convention, or, few years
later, hysterically described the
Chicago platform as "a second
declaration ofindependence," of re-
luctantly admitting that the pop
ulist party, if not actually de-
funct, is at least in articulo
mortiS.
Some of those who were re-
Gently leaders in the reform
movement 60 so far as to predict
that the popuIists will not again
hold national convention, or
put another presidential ticket
into the field. Others, more ret
icent in discussing the party's
probable future, avoid all refer
ence to national campaigns but,
express the hope that their
party, by maintaining it's organ
ization in certain sections, may
continue to be a factor in local
politics. These Mark Tapleys
are not sanguine enough. how
ever, to venture the assertion
that populism will ever again
amount to anything as national
movement.
Who killed populism? This is
another question which bobs up
for discussion when two or three
politicians get together. 1t is
heard so cften that it reminds
one of that other famous query,
"Who killed Cock Robin?"
Probably one of these ques-
tlons is as important as the other.
But opinion IN the northwest is
very much divided IN locating
the responsibility for the snuff
ing OUT of the populist beacon.
Republicans, as rule, mann
tain that, as populism, at best.
was. never anything more than a
fungous growth, it naturally dis
appeared before the sunlight of
prosperity which has flooded
the land since the first year of
the late President McKinley's
administration. Former leaders
of the populist party assert that
it was fusion which brought the
new party to an untimely grave.
The bolder ones among these
erstwhile party chieftains out
spokenly declare that it was the
leadership of VIM. J. Bryan
which derailed the populist train
and sent it, a hopeless wreck, to
the bottom of the political ditch.
Democrats are not disposed to
talk much about the decadence
of popullsm. They say it is
mot their funeral" and many
of them proclaim that they ''are
disgusted with the unholy alli-
ance made at Chicago in 1896,
and are prepared to repndiate
the present leadership of the
democratic party at the first op--
portunity." 1t looks, therefore,
as if the passing of popullsm
will bring a reorganization, ifnot
a rejuvenation, of the old-time
democracy. Indeed, the political
skies in the northwest are full
of signs at present, all more or
less Omnous.
We've foes within and foes without,
Trying to hold back our progress