siasm of the labouring people reached its highest pitch. They felt that, baffled and defeated as they were in their economic struggle, they were now nearing victory in the struggle for the control of government. A considerable campaign fund was speedily formed by an assessment of 25 cents per capita upon the members of each union. Besides, money was coming in from collections at campaign meetings and from individual donations. Sympathisers among professional people also contributed liberally and organised numerous Henry George clubs. A daily paper, the Leader, was issued, for which the Central Labor Union gave $1,000, the carpenters, $1,500, and other affiliated unions, $100 each. It was edited by Louis F. Post, counsel of the Central Labor Union, with the collaboration of many unpaid writers upon other papers who gave their spare time to the cause. Its circulation was 30,000 on the first day and reached 52,000 on the second; so that it was almost self-supporting. The New Yorker Volkszeitung, and, during a part of the campaign until the opposition of the Catholic Church developed, the Irish World, were the only other papers which supported George.

Against them was pitted the powerful press of the city of New York. When the movement was still in its initial stage, the press tried to counteract it with ridicule. When, however, George was named and his election became probable, a bitter and concerted attack was opened upon him. In this the Daily Illustrated Graphic, the Evening Post, and Harper's Weekly, especially excelled. "Revolutionist," and "Apostle of anarchy and destruction" were not the harshest epithets hurled at him. On the other side, George's campaign was of the most unusual nature for New York. Mass meetings were numerous and large. Most of them were held in the open air, usually on the street corners. From the system by which one speaker followed another, speaking at several meeting places in a night, the labour campaign got its nickname of the "tailboard campaign." The common people, women and men, gathered in hundreds and often thousands around a truck from which the shifting speakers addressed the crowd. The speakers were volunteers, including representatives of the liberal professions, lawyers, physicians, teachers, ministers, and labour

leaders. At such mass meetings George did most of his campaigning, making several speeches a night, once as many as eleven. 21 The single tax and the prevailing political corruption were favourite topics.

Of the two opponents of George, Hewitt had by far a clearer conception of the significance of the campaign than Roosevelt. In his speech of acceptance, Hewitt squarely stated the issue in the following words:

"A new issue has . . . been suddenly sprung upon this community. An attempt is being made to organise one class of our citizens against all other classes, and to place the Government of the city in the hands of men willing to represent the special interests of this class [labour], to the exclusion of the just rights of the other classes.

Between capitalists, or those who control capital, and laborers, there may be a conflict of interests, which, like all other disputes, must be adjusted by mutual concessions, or by the operation of the law. . . . With more experience and better education, the evils of strikes, lockouts, and boycotts will pass away. Conciliation and arbitration will take place of denunciation and hostility." 22

George denied the class nature of the movement, and replied in his first public letter to Hewitt:

"You have heard so much of the working-class that you evidently forget that the 'working-class' is in reality not a class, but the mass, and that any political movement in which they engage is not that of one class against other classes, but, as one English statesman has happily phrased it, a movement of the masses against the classes.' ... I do not stand as the candidate of the hand-workers alone. Among the men who have given me the most democratic nomination given to an American citizen in our time are not wholly handworkers, but working-men of all kinds — editors, reporters, teachers, clergymen, artists, authors, physicians, store-keepers, merchantsin short, representatives of all classes of men who earn their living by the exertion of their hand and head." 28

An exchange of public letters between Hewitt and George followed. Hewitt criticised the single tax as "robbery " but avoided all reference to the existing political corruption. He also rejected George's offer of a public debate. Hewitt's letters and speeches accomplished their purpose; he succeeded in frightening the business men.

21 The George-Hewitt Campaign, 106.

22 Ibid., 31-37.

28 Ibid., 46-50.

Among the non-labour supporters of George, the greatest at tention was attracted by Father McGlynn, a Catholic priest. Owing to his great popularity among Catholics, his public advocacy of the single tax and of George's candidacy he was considered by the Democrats as a source of great danger. With the view of counteracting it, the chairman of Tammany Hall's committee on resolutions addressed a letter to Thomas S. Preston, vicar-general of the Catholic Church, asking if it were true that the Catholic clergymen were in favour of Henry George. The reply brought the anticipated assurance that the great majority of the Catholic clergy strongly condemned and would "deeply regret the election of Mr. George to any position of influence." The letter was given the widest circulation. It was distributed in front of Catholic churches and among Catholic worshippers on their return from service. The press also gave it wide publicity.

Shortly before election day, the Democratic politicians spread the rumor that Powderly was opposed to George's candidacy. At the beginning of the campaign Powderly had decided to take no part, but, seeing that his attitude was misinterpreted into an indication of opposition to George, he ordered a mass meeting called in New York on the eve of the election and came out in his speech strongly in favour of the independent candidates.

The vote cast was 90,000 for Hewitt, 68,000 for George, and 60,000 for Roosevelt. There is sufficient ground for the belief that George was counted out of thousands of votes. The nature of the George voters can be sufficiently gathered from an analysis of the pledges to vote for him.24 An apparently trustworthy investigation was made by a representative of the Sun. He drew the conclusion that the vast majority were not simply wage-earners, but also naturalised immigrants, mainly Irish, Germans, and Bohemians, the native element being in the minority. While the Irish were divided between George and Hewitt, the majority of the German element had gone over to Henry George."

25

The outcome was hailed as a victory by George and his sup

24 Although no longer solicited after the nomination was made, the pledges spon

taneously continued to pour in, reaching a total of 42,500.

25 New York Sun, Oct. 22, 1886.

porters, and this view was also taken by the general press. It assured the continuance of the labour party, and inspired labour with an ambition for success on a larger scale in the future. The effect upon the old parties is shown by labour laws passed at the legislative session of 1887, creating a board of mediation and arbitration, regulating tenement houses, providing for the labelling and marketing of convict-made goods, perfecting the mechanics' lien, regulating employment of women and children, regulating the hours of labour on street, surface, and elevated railroads, and finally amending the notorious penal code by prohibiting employers, singly or combined, from coercing employés not to join a labour organisation. 26

Soon after the election, cleavage began in the movement. The single taxers aspired to place the party entirely upon a single tax basis and in doing so came to disregard its labour character. In fact, since they were aspiring to make the party one of all producing classes against the landlords and special privilege, a specific labour character, or what amounted to the same, a class character, appeared to them as out of harmony with their philosophy and seemed tactically imprudent. The extreme popularity of Henry George among the wage-earners facilitated the task. But active opposition came from the socialists. To these, the nature of the movement as one of wage earners had been the only ground for joining, as they believed that a labour party once formed would by the logic of events be forced to accept socialism. Consequently, the success of the designs of the single taxers would have meant their dismal failure. Although their influence among the labour people was far less than that of Henry George, their control of the German unions, their compactness of organisation, and skilful leadership in the person of Schevitsch, made them a force not to be despised. At first both sides carefully avoided open rupture.

The leaders close to Henry George called a mass meeting at Cooper Union on November 6, and, as a result, a temporary executive committee of three, Father McGlynn, John McMackin, and James Redpath, one of the editors of the North American Review, was appointed to establish the Progressive Democracy, as the party was named, on a permanent basis.

26 New York Bureau of Labor, Report, 1887, pp. 786-776.

The committee on laws of the Central Labor Union was recognised as the committee on laws of the party. This committee worked out a provisional constitution. On November 9, the district organisers of the Central Labor Union met. They rejected the name Progressive Democracy as well as Land and Labor party, favoured by none, but named the party the United Labor party. They also decided to call a county convention on January 6, 1887, in which each assembly district was to be represented by one delegate for each 200 votes cast on November 2 altogether 340 delegates. Meanwhile, an organisation was to be established in each assembly district.

The committee of three continued its work along parallel lines by organising "Land and Labor Clubs," organisations, which, although they contained a considerable portion of wageearners among their membership, were led solely by intellectuals. On the other hand, the assembly district organisations were manned and led by wage-earners.

27

The county convention met on the appointed day. Three hundred and twenty of the 340 delegates were wage-earners. McMackin was elected chairman. Committees on organisation and constitution were elected. The former contained the socialists, Hugo Vogt, Lucien Sanial, and Daniel De Leon. The latter, Richard T. Hinton, H. Emrich, socialists, and James P. Archibald, the recording secretary of the Central Labor Union. The Clarendon Hall platform was reaffirmed and also the name United Labor party. The constitution provided for election district organisations, assembly district organisations, a county general committee, and a county executive board. It included a clause stating that no person "shall be eligible to membership unless... he has severed all connections with all other political parties, organisations and clubs." 28 It was under this clause that the socialists were later expelled.

..

County organisations were also formed in Kings (Brooklyn), Albany, Erie (Buffalo), and several other counties in the State. The organisation of land and labour clubs was energetically carried on, and fifteen existed in New York alone.

27 Quoted from the New Yorker Voltszeitung by the New York Standard, Jan. 22, 1887.

28 New York Leader, Jan. 22, 1887.