what were the three main issues that led to the creation of third parties

Third phase in the development of electoral politics in the United states of america, 1856–1892

Tertiary Party System

← Second 1854–1894 Fourth →

United States presidential election tendencies summarized betwixt 1856 and 1892. Blue shaded states commonly voted for the Democratic Political party, while reddish shaded states usually voted for the Republican Party. Light-green shaded states voted for the Populist Political party in 1892.

In the terminology of historians and political scientists, the Third Party System was a menstruum in the history of political parties in the United states of america from the 1850s until the 1890s, which featured profound developments in issues of American nationalism, modernization, and race. This menstruation, the later part of which is often termed the Gilded Historic period, is defined past its dissimilarity with the eras of the Second Party System and the Fourth Political party Organization.

Information technology was dominated by the new Republican Party, which claimed success in saving the Union, abolishing slavery and enfranchising the freedmen, while adopting many Whig-style modernization programs such as national banks, railroads, loftier tariffs, homesteads, social spending (such as on greater Civil State of war veteran pension funding), and help to country grant colleges. While most elections from 1876 through 1892 were extremely close, the opposition Democrats won simply the 1884 and 1892 presidential elections (the Democrats also won the pop vote in the 1876 and 1888 presidential elections, just lost the electoral college vote), though from 1875 to 1895 the party normally controlled the United states of america Business firm of Representatives and controlled the United States Senate from 1879–1881 and 1893–1895. Some scholars emphasize that the 1876 ballot saw a realignment and the collapse of support for Reconstruction.^[ane]

The northern and western states were largely Republican, except for the closely counterbalanced New York, Indiana, New Jersey, and Connecticut. Afterwards 1876, the Democrats took control of the "Solid South".^[2]

Voter beliefs [edit]

Equally with the preceding Second Party Organization era, the 3rd was characterized past intense voter interest, routinely high voter turnout, unflinching party loyalty, dependence on nominating conventions, hierarchical party organizations, and the systematic use of authorities jobs every bit patronage for party workers, known as the spoils system. Cities of l,000 or more than developed ward and citywide "bosses" who could depend on the votes of clients, especially contempo immigrants. Newspapers continued to be the principal communication system, with the peachy majority closely linked to one party or the other.^[3]

Broad coalitions from each party [edit]

Both parties consisted of broad-based voting coalitions. Throughout the N, businessmen, shop owners, skilled craftsmen, clerks and professionals favored the Republicans, as did more modern, commercially oriented farmers. In the S, the Republicans won strong support from the freedmen (newly enfranchised African Americans), simply the political party was normally controlled by local whites ("scalawags") and opportunistic Yankees ("carpetbaggers"). The race issue pulled the neat majority of white southerners into the Autonomous Party every bit Redeemers.

The Autonomous Political party was dominated by conservative, pro-business Bourbon Democrats, who usually controlled the national convention from 1868 until their great defeat by William Jennings Bryan in 1896. The Democratic coalition was composed of traditional Democrats in the Due north (many of them former Copperheads). They were joined by the Redeemers in the S and past Catholic immigrants, especially Irish-Americans and German-Americans. In improver, the party attracted unskilled laborers and hard-scrabble former-stock farmers in remote areas of New England and along the Ohio River valley.^[4]

Faith: pietistic Republicans versus liturgical Democrats [edit]

Religious lines were sharply drawn.^[5] Methodists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Scandinavian Lutherans and other pietists in the North were tightly linked to the Republicans. In sharp contrast, liturgical groups, especially the Catholics, Episcopalians, and High german Lutherans, looked to the Democratic Political party for protection from pietistic moralism, specially prohibition. While both parties cut across economic class structures, the Democrats were supported more heavily past its lower tiers.^[six]

Cultural issues, specially prohibition and public-funding for Catholic schools (as well as non-English schools of both Protestant and Catholic denominations) in parity with what were at the time Protestant-based, English-language public schools, became important because of the sharp religious divisions in the electorate. In the North, most fifty% of the voters were pietistic Protestants who believed the government should be used to reduce social sins, such equally drinking. Liturgical churches constituted over a quarter of the vote and wanted the government to stay out of personal morality issues. Prohibition debates and referendums heated upwards politics in near states over a flow of decades, and national prohibition was finally passed in 1918 (repealed in 1932), serving equally a major issue between the largely wet Democrats and the largely dry Republicans - although there was a pro-Prohibition faction within the Democratic Party and an anti-Prohibition faction within the Republican Party.^[5]

Voting behavior by religion, northern United states of america late 19th century
Religion	% Dem	% Rep
Immigrants
Irish Catholics	80	xx
All Catholics	70	thirty
Confessional German language Lutherans	65	35
German Reformed	60	40
French Canadian Catholics	fifty	fifty
Less Confessional German language Lutherans	45	55
English Canadians	forty	lx
British Stock	35	65
German Sectarians	30	70
Norwegian Lutherans	xx	80
Swedish Lutherans	fifteen	85
Haugean Norwegians	5	95
Natives
Northern Stock
Quakers	five	95
Free Will Baptists	twenty	80
Congregational	25	75
Methodists	25	75
Regular Baptists	35	65
Blacks	40	60
Presbyterians	40	60
Episcopalians	45	55
Southern Stock
Disciples	50	50
Presbyterians	70	30
Baptists	75	25
Methodists	90	ten

Source: Paul Kleppner, The Third Electoral System 1853–1892 (1979) p. 182

Realignment in the 1850s [edit]

The Republican Party emerged from the great political realignment of the mid-1850s. William Gienapp argues that the great realignment of the 1850s began before the Whig party demise, and was caused non by politicians simply by voters at the local level. The central forces were ethno-cultural, involving tensions between pietistic Protestants versus liturgical Catholics, Lutherans and Episcopalians regarding Catholicism, prohibition, and nativism. Various prohibitionist and nativist movements emerged, especially the American Political party, based originally on the underground Know Nothing lodges. It was a moralistic party that appealed to the heart-class fear of corruption—identifying that danger with Catholics, specially the contempo Irish gaelic immigrants who seemed to bring crime, corruption, poverty and bossism as soon every bit they arrived. Anti-slavery did play a office but it was less important at first. The Know-Nothing party embodied the social forces at work, but its weak leadership was unable to solidify its organization, and the Republicans picked it apart. Nativism was so powerful that the Republicans could not avert it, but they did minimize it and turn voter wrath confronting the threat that slave owners would buy upward the good subcontract lands wherever slavery was allowed. The realignment was and then powerful considering it forced voters to switch parties, equally typified past the rise and autumn of the Know-Nothings, the rise of the Republican Party, and the splits in the Democratic Political party. The Republican Party was more driven, in terms of credo and talent; information technology surpassed the hapless American Party in 1856. By 1858 the Republicans controlled majorities in every Northern land, and hence controlled the electoral votes for president in 1860.^{[seven] [8] [ix]}

Ideology [edit]

The ideological force driving the new party was modernization, and opposition to slavery, that anti-modernistic threat. By 1856 the Republicans were crusading for "Free Soil, Gratuitous Labor, Frémont and Victory." The main argument was that a 'Slave Power' had seized control of the federal authorities and would try to brand slavery legal in the territories, and peradventure even in the northern states. That would give rich slave owners the chance to get anywhere and buy upwardly the best land, thus undercutting the wages of gratis labor and destroying the foundations of civil guild. The Democratic response was to countercrusade in 1856, alarm that the ballot of Republican candidate John C. Frémont would produce civil war. The outstanding leader of the Democrats was Illinois Senator Stephen Douglas; he believed that the democratic process in each state or territory should settle the slavery question. When President James Buchanan tried to rig politics in Kansas Territory to approve slavery, Douglas broke with him, presaging the split that ruined the party in 1860. That year, northern Democrats nominated Douglas as the candidate of democracy, while the southern wing put upwardly John Breckinridge equally the upholder of the rights of property and of states' rights, which in this context meant slavery. In the Due south, ex-Whigs organized an advertisement hoc "Ramble Union" Political party, pledging to proceed the nation united on the basis of the Constitution, regardless of republic, states' rights, property or liberty. The Republicans played it safe in 1860, passing over meliorate-known radicals in favor of a moderate edge-land pol known to be an articulate advocate of liberty. Abraham Lincoln fabricated no speeches, letting the political party apparatus march the armies to the polls. Fifty-fifty if all three of Lincoln'south opponents had formed a common ticket–quite impossible in view of their ideological differences–his 40 percentage of the vote was enough to carry the North and thus win the electoral college.^[ten]

Civil War [edit]

It was the measure out of genius of President Lincoln not only that he won his war only that he did so past drawing upon and synthesizing the strengths of anti-slavery, free soil, democracy, and nationalism.^[xi] The Confederacy abandoned all party activity, and thereby forfeited the advantages of a nationwide organization committed to support of the administration. In the Union, the Republican Political party unanimously supported the war effort, finding officers, enlisted men, enlistment bonuses, aid to wives and widows, war supplies, bond purchases, and the enthusiasm that was critical to victory. The Democrats at first supported a war for Union, and in 1861 many Democratic politicians became colonels and generals. Announced by Lincoln in September 1862, the Emancipation Proclamation was designed primarily to destroy the economical base of the 'Slave Ability'. It initially alienated many northern Democrats and even moderate Republicans. They were reluctant to support a war for the benefit of what they considered an inferior race. The Democrats fabricated significant gains in the 1862 midterm elections, merely the Republicans remained in control with the back up of the Unionist Political party. Success on the battleground (especially the autumn of Atlanta) significantly bolstered the Republicans in the election of 1864. The Democrats attempted to capitalize on negative reactions to the Emancipation, but by 1864 these had faded somewhat due to its success in undermining the South. Additionally, the Republicans made charges of treason against 'Copperheads' a successful entrada upshot. Increasingly the Union Army became Republican in its makeup; probably a majority of Democrats who enlisted marched dwelling house Republican, including such key leaders as John Logan and Ben Butler.^[12]

Postbellum [edit]

The Civil War and Reconstruction issues polarized the parties until the Compromise of 1877 finally ended the political warfare. War problems resonated for a quarter century, as Republicans waved the "encarmine shirt" (of dead union soldiers), and Democrats warned against non-existent "Black supremacy" in the Southward and plutocracy in the North. The modernizing Republicans who had founded the party in 1854 looked askance at the perceived corruption of Ulysses Due south. Grant and his war veterans, bolstered past the solid vote of freedmen. The dissenters formed a "Liberal Republican" Party in 1872, only to have it smashed by Grant's reelection. By the mid-1870s it was clear that Confederate nationalism was dead; all but the most ardent Republican 'Stalwarts' agreed that the southern Republican coalition of African-American freedmen, scalawags and carpetbaggers was helpless and hopeless. In 1874 the Democrats won big majorities in Congress, with economical low a major effect. People asked how much longer the Republicans could employ the Army to impose control in the South.^[2]

An 1881 cartoon attacking the imperial splendor of Garfield's inauguration in dissimilarity to Jefferson's republican simplicity (upper left)

Rutherford Hayes became President after a highly controversial electoral count, demonstrating that the corruption of Southern politics threatened the legitimacy of the presidency itself. Later on Hayes removed the last federal troops in 1877, the Republican Party in the South sank into oblivion, kept live only by the crumbs of federal patronage. It would be forty years before a Republican would win a erstwhile Amalgamated state in a presidential ballot.^[xiii]

Climax and plummet, 1890–1896 [edit]

New issues emerged in the belatedly 1880s, as Grover Cleveland and the Bourbon Democrats made the low tariff "for revenue only" a rallying cry for Democrats in the 1888 election, and the Republican Congress in 1890 legislated high tariffs and high spending. At the state level moralistic pietists pushed difficult for prohibition, and in some states for the emptying of foreign-language schools serving German language immigrants. The Bennett Law in Wisconsin produced a bruising ethnocultural battle in that state in 1890, which the Democrats won. The millions of postwar immigrants divided politically along ethnic and religious lines, with enough Germans moving into the Democratic Party to give the Democrats a national majority in 1892. Party loyalties were starting to weaken, as evidenced by the move back and along of the German vote and the sudden ascension of the Populists. Regular army-manner campaigns of necessity had to exist supplemented past "campaigns of education", which focused more on the swing voters.^[fourteen]

Autonomous magazine ridicules Republican use of "encarmine shirt" memories of war

Cleveland's second term was ruined by a major low, the Panic of 1893, which as well undercut the appeal of the loosely organized Populist coalitions in the south and west. A stunning Republican triumph in 1894 nearly wiped out the Democratic Party north of the Mason–Dixon line. In the 1896 election William Jennings Bryan and the radical silverites seized control of the Democratic Political party, denounced their own president, and called for a return to Jeffersonian agrarianism (see Jeffersonian republic). Bryan, in his Cross of Gold speech, talked about workers and farmers crucified by big business, evil bankers and the gold standard. With Bryan giving from five to 35 speeches a day throughout the Midwest, straw polls showed his crusade forging a pb in the disquisitional Midwest. Republicans William McKinley and Mark Hanna and so seized control of the situation; their countercrusade was a campaign of education making lavish use of new advertising techniques. McKinley warned that Bryan's bimetallism would wreck the economy and accomplish equality by making everyone poor. McKinley promised prosperity through strong economic growth based on audio coin and business confidence, and an abundance of high-paying industrial jobs. Farmers would benefit past selling to a rich dwelling market place. Every racial, ethnic and religious group would prosper, and the government would never exist used by i group to set on another. In particular McKinley reassured the German language-Americans, alarmed on the 1 hand by Bryan's inflation and on the other past prohibition. McKinley's overwhelming victory combined city and farm, Northeast and Midwest, businessmen and manufacturing plant workers. He carried nearly every city of fifty,000 population, while Bryan swept the rural South (which was off-limits to the Republicans) and Mount states. McKinley's victory, ratified by an even more decisive reelection in 1900, thus solidified one of the fundamental ideologies of twentieth-century American politics, pluralism.^[fourteen]

Campaigning changes in 1896 [edit]

By campaigning tirelessly with over 500 speeches in 100 days, William Jennings Bryan seized control of the headlines in the 1896 election. It no longer mattered as much what the editorial page said—most newspapers opposed him—equally long as his speeches made the forepart page. Financing also inverse radically. Nether the Second and Third Political party Systems, parties financed their campaigns through patronage; now civil service reform was undercutting that revenue, and entirely new, outside sources of funding became critical. Mark Hanna systematically told nervous businessmen and financiers that he had a business organisation plan to win the election, and and so billed them for their share of the cost. Hanna spent $three.5 one thousand thousand in three months for speakers, pamphlets, posters, and rallies that all warned of doom and chaos if Bryan should win, and offered prosperity and pluralism under William McKinley. Party loyalty itself weakened as voters were switching between parties much more often. It became respectable to declare oneself an 'independent'.^[xv]

Third Parties [edit]

Throughout the nineteenth century, third parties such as the Prohibition Party, Greenback Party and the Populist Party evolved from widespread antiparty sentiment and a belief that governance should nourish to the public good rather than partisan agendas. Because this position was based more on social experiences than any political ideology, nonpartisan activity was generally about effective on the local level. Equally third-party candidates tried to affirm themselves in mainstream politics, withal, they were forced to betray the antiparty foundations of the move by allying with major partisan leaders. These alliances and the factionalism they engendered discouraged nonpartisan supporters and undermined the third-party motion by the end of the nineteenth century. Many reformers and nonpartisans subsequently lent support to the Republican Party, which promised to attend to issues of import to them, such every bit anti-slavery or prohibition.^[16]

Fourth Political party System, 1896–1932 [edit]

The overwhelming Republican victory, repeated in 1900, restored business concern confidence, began three decades of prosperity for which the Republicans took credit, and swept away the issues and personalities of the Third Political party System.^[17] The flow 1896–1932 can exist chosen the Quaternary Party System. Most voting blocs connected unchanged, simply others realigned themselves, giving a strong Republican authority in the industrial Northeast, though the way was clear for the Progressive Era to impose a new way of thinking and a new calendar for politics.^[eighteen]

Alarmed at the new rules of the game for campaign funding, the Progressives launched investigations and exposures (by the 'muckraker' journalists) into corrupt links between political party bosses and business. New laws and ramble amendments weakened the party bosses by installing primaries and direct electing senators. Theodore Roosevelt shared the growing business concern with business influence on government. When William Howard Taft appeared to be likewise cozy with pro-business conservatives in terms of tariff and conservation issues, Roosevelt broke with his former friend and his old political party. After losing the 1912 Republican nomination to Taft, he founded a new "Bull Moose" Progressive Party and ran every bit a third candidate. Although he outpolled Taft (who won only 2 states) in both the popular vote and the electoral higher, the Republican split elected Woodrow Wilson and made pro-business conservatives the dominant strength in the Republican Party.^[19]

See too [edit]

• Party systems in the Us
• American election campaigns in the 19th century
• Gilded Historic period
• History of the Democratic Party (Us)
• History of the Republican Party (United States)
• Political parties in the United States

Citations [edit]

1. ^ James E. Campbell, "Political party Systems and Realignments in the United states of america, 1868–2004," Social Science History Fall 2006, Vol. thirty, Iss. three, pp. 359–86
2. ^ ^{a b} Foner (1988)
3. ^ Kleppner (1979) gives detailed reports on voter behavior in every region.
4. ^ Kleppner (1979); Jensen (1971)
5. ^ ^{a b} Kleppner (1979)
6. ^ Richard Jensen, The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Disharmonize, 1888–1896 (1971) online
7. ^ Holt (1978)
8. ^ William Gienapp, The Origins of the Republican Party, 1852-1856 (Oxford UP, 1987)
9. ^ William Gienapp, "Nativism and the Creation of a Republican Bulk in the North before the Civil War." Journal of American History 72.3 (1985): 529-559 online
10. ^ Foner (1995); Silbey (1991)
11. ^ Paludan p. 25. Paludan writes of Lincoln'south political skills, "He was an excellent political leader at a time when parties provided unity and direction for governmental behavior and were sources of intense interest throughout the polity. He knew how to organize political force, how to encourage his supporters to achieve their ends.... During the war when lawmakers began to question and at times to challenge decisions he had made or intrude on executive prerogatives, his political skills would discover important uses. Simply there was a much deeper level to Lincoln'southward political skills than his ability to maneuver and to balance factions; there was the quality of the human being himself. He possessed a basic self-cognition and security that immune him to negotiate and discuss and converse with friends and political foes while respecting their intrinsic integrity."
12. ^ Silbey (1991); Hansen (1980)
13. ^ Vincent P. De Santis, Republicans Confront the Southern Question (1969)
14. ^ ^{a b} Jensen (1971)
15. ^ Jensen (1971) ch 10; Keller (1977)
16. ^ Come across Voss-Hubbard (1999); Keller (1977)
17. ^ Dean Burnham, Walter (2016). "Periodization Schemes and "Party Systems": The "System of 1896" equally a Example in Point". Social Scientific discipline History. x (3): 263–314. doi:10.1017/S0145553200015467.
18. ^ Keller (1977)^{[ page needed ]}; McGerr (2003)^{[ page needed ]}
19. ^ McGerr (2003)^{[ page needed ]}

Farther reading [edit]

• Bensel, Richard Franklin. The Political Economy of American Industrialization, 1877–1900 (2000)
• Calhoun, Charles W. From Bloody Shirt to Full Dinner Pail: The Transformation of Politics and Governance in the Gilded Age (2010) excerpt and text search
• Calhoun, Charles W. Minority Victory: Golden Age Politics and the Front Porch Campaign of 1888 (2008) 243 pp.
• Campbell, James E. "Party Systems and Realignments in the Usa, 1868–2004", Social Science History, Fall 2006, Vol. 30 Event 3, pp. 359–386
• Cherny, Robert. American Politics in the Gilded Age 1868–1900 (1997)
• DeCanio, Samuel. "Religion and Nineteenth-Century Voting Behavior: A New Look at Some Former Data", Periodical of Politics, 2007. 69: 339–350
• Dinkin, Robert J. Voting and Vote-Getting in American History (2016), expanded edition of Dinkin, Candidature in America: A History of Election Practices. (Greenwood 1989)
• Foner, Eric. Free Soil, Free Labor, Gratuitous Men: The Credo of the Republican Party before the Civil State of war (1995). .
• Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877 (1988)
• Gienap, William E. The Origins of the Republican Party, 1852–1856 (1987)
• Gienap, William East. "'Politics Seem to Enter into Everything': Political Culture in the Northward, 1840–1860", in Gienapp et al., eds. Essays on American Antebellum Politics, 1840-1860 (1982) pp. 15–79
• Hansen, Stephen Fifty. The Making of the Third Party Arrangement: Voters and Parties in Illinois, 1850–1876. Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1980. 280 pp.
• Holt, Michael F. The Political Crisis of the 1850s (1978).
• Holt, Michael F. "The Primacy of Party Reasserted." Journal of American History 1999 86(ane): 151–157. in JSTOR
• James, Scott C. Presidents, Parties, and the State: A Party System Perspective on Democratic Regulatory Choice, 1884–1936. (2000). 307 pp.
• Jensen, Richard. The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888–1896 (1971)
• Jensen, Richard. "Democracy, Republicanism and Efficiency: The Values of American Politics, 1885–1930", in Byron Shafer and Anthony Badger, eds, Contesting Democracy: Substance and Structure in American Political History, 1775–2000 (Academy of Kansas Press, 2001) pp. 149–180; online version
• Josephson, Matthew. The Politicos: 1865–1896 (1938).
• Kazin, Michael. What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party (2022)excerpt

• Keller, Morton. Affairs of State: Public Life in Late Nineteenth Century America (1977).
• Keller, Morton. America'southward Three Regimes: A New Political History (2007) 384 pp.
• Kleppner, Paul. The 3rd Balloter System 1853–1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures (1979), the most important and detailed analysis of voting behavior.
• Klinghard, Daniel. The Nationalization of American Political Parties, 1880–1896 (2010) excerpt and text search, political science perspective
• Lynch, G. Patrick "U.S. Presidential Elections in the Nineteenth Century: Why Civilisation and the Economy Both Mattered." Polity 35#one (2002) pp. 29+. focus on 1884
• McGerr, Michael. A Violent Discontent: The Ascension and Autumn of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870–1920 (2003)
• Miller, Worth Robert. "The Lost World of Gilded Age Politics", Periodical of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era vol ane, no. i (January 2002): 49–67, online edition
• Morgan, H. Wayne. From Hayes to McKinley: National Party Politics, 1877–1896 (1969)
• Ostrogorski, M. Democracy and the Party System in the United States (1910) classic assay, emphasizing political party operations and corruption
• Paludan, Phillip Shaw. The Presidency of Abraham Lincoln.(1994) ISBN 0-7006-0745-v
• Postel, Charles. The Populist Vision (2007) excerpt and text search
• Potter, David. The Impending Crisis 1848–1861. (1976); Pulitzer Prize
• Rhodes, James Ford. History of the Usa from the Compromise of 1850 to the Roosevelt-Taft Administration (1920), 8 vols.: highly detailed narrative from 1850 to 1909 online edition
• Rothbard, Murray N. The Progressive Era (2017), pp. 109–98, emphasis on popular voting online excerpt
• Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr., ed. History of American Presidential Elections, 1789–2008 (2011) 3 vol and 11 vol editions; detailed analysis of each election, with main documents; online v. one. 1789–1824; 5. 2. 1824–1844; 5. 3. 1848–1868; 5. four. 1872–1888; v. 5. 1892–1908; v. 6. 1912–1924; v. 7. 1928–1940; v. 8. 1944–1956; v. nine. 1960–1968; 5. 10. 1972–1984; v. 11. 1988–2001
• Silbey, Joel. The American Political Nation, 1838–1893 (1991).
• Smith, Adam I. P. No Party Now: Politics in the Civil War Northward (2006)extract and text search
• Summers, Mark Wahlgren. The Era of Good Stealings (1993), covers corruption 1868–1877
• Summers, Marking Wahlgren. Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884 (2000)
• Summers, Mark Wahlgren. Party Games: Getting, Keeping, and Using Power in Gold Age Politics (2003) extract and text search
• Summers, Marking Wahlgren.The Press Gang: Newspapers and Politics, 1865–1878 (1994)
• Voss-Hubbard, Mark. "The 'Third Political party Tradition' Reconsidered: Third Parties and American Public Life, 1830–1900." Journal of American History 1999 86(1): 121–150. in JSTOR

Primary sources [edit]

• Silbey, Joel H., ed. The American party battle: ballot campaign pamphlets, 1828–1876 (2 vol., 1999) vol 1 online; online edition vol 2

External links [edit]

• Harper's Weekly 150 cartoons on elections 1860–1912; Reconstruction topics; Chinese exclusion; plus American Political Prints from the Library of Congress, 1766-1876
  • Elections 1860–1912 as covered by Harper's Weekly; news, editorials, cartoons (many by Thomas Nast)
  • Thomas Nast cartoons strongly pro-Republican, pro-Reconstruction, anti-South, anti-Irish and anti-Catholic
  • more Nast cartoons
  • still more Nast
• "Graphic Witness" caricatures in history
• Gilded Historic period & Progressive Era Cartoons, industry, labor, politics, prohibition from Ohio State
• Puck cartoons
• Keppler cartoons
• 1892 cartoons
• Photographs of prominent politicians, 1861–1922; these are pre-1923 and out of copyright

gilbertsonandere.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Party_System

Share this post