opulist convention at Columbus, Nebraska, in 1890.

Populism

Populist convention at Columbus, Nebraska, in 1890. Populist convention at Columbus, Nebraska, in 1890. These ideas blossomed into a political party formed in 1892 largely by Alliance members, disgruntled Democrats, a few Republicans, and an assortment of former Greenbackers, Knights of Labor, and Grangers. Reasoning that in order to shape the reform measures they sought, Populists would have to win elections, take over state houses, and claim a presence in Congress or even the White House. The goals articulated by the Southern Alliance drove the Populist Party Platform, formulated at the Omaha People’s party convention on July 4, 1892. The platform called for the free and unlimited coinage of silver and the subtreasury plan as two of its most important planks, but many of the ideas put forth by the Populists were so far ahead of their time that they were virtually untenable to the majority of Americans. Not until the twentieth century—during the Progressive era and the New Deal – did most of the Populist agenda become law. The Populist party goal to seek greater government involvement in the lives of its citizens through progressive legislation or constitutional amendments was its major contribution to reform in the nation and in the South. In the 1892 elections, Populists nationally made modest gains: they won 10 percent of the vote, and elected five senators, three governors, and 1,500 state legislators. Did you know? Did you know? Women shared their political opinions in essays and letters to the Progressive Farmer and the Southern Mercury, two Alliance/Populist newspapers. They considered themselves a good “moralizing influence” such that “no good Alliance man ever wants to meet unless the sisters are there,” wrote Mary from Limestone County, Texas, to the Southern Mercury, May 1888. Populism and Gender and Race The Farmers’ Alliances and the Populist party worked toward the same ends of achieving a measure of economic progress and winning elections, but they also stretched the boundaries of gender and race restrictions. Women formed an important part of the movement by bringing a social element to the meetings, and they provided sharp rhetorical feedback on the movement’s progress. Fueled by evangelical oratory, grass roots politicking, and family centered camp meetings, the Alliances allowed women a place in which to share their grievances equally with men. As Katie Moore wrote in the Progressive Farmer, “This is the only order that allows us equal privileges to the men; we certainly should appreciate the privilege and prove to the world that we are worthy to be considered on an equal footing with them.” The Alliances helped women sense the possibilities of political activism once they won the right to vote. About one-fourth of the Alliance members were women; in some locales women’s membership reached as high as 50 percent. They voted on potential members and held elected Alliance offices; they wrote speeches and newspaper editorials, and they supported prohibition. Finally, they sought better education for farm families, including their daughters. One of their long sought goals was the creation of institutions of higher education and training for women in “home economics” and teaching. The result of their demands for state supported institutions led to the opening of industrial colleges for women in Mississippi (1985), South Carolina (1891), and Texas (1903). Teacher training institutes for women seemed a good idea to most southern legislators, and between 1889 and 1908 Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma chartered state colleges for women. Did you know? One of the most passionate white advocates of Populism, Tom Watson of Georgia, although not a liberal on race, campaigned with black Populists and sought their votes. “There is no reason why the black man should not understand that the law that hurts me, as a farmer, hurts him, as a farmer. . . .” Watson opined.