Saturday, February 24. Good morning.
To give proper context to these days that led up to truly one of the most insane Chicago City Council meetings ever held, on Saturday, November 4, 1893, I need to write more about something that happened during the mayoral election that Spring that put into stark relief the power of the Chicago newspapers and to what extent they were willing to exert it.
In the Spring of 1893, when Carter Harrison was running again for Mayor, all of the major newspapers (except the paper he owned and published, the Times) worked overtly to prevent Harrison from being re-elected. It’s one of the few times that the ubiquity of press outlets in Gilded Age Chicago worked against a Democratic outcome. Luckily for Democracy - though, alas, not for him ultimately - Harrison won anyway.
It reminds me - as if I needed reminding, but I think this framing isn’t used as often as it could be - that the health of a democracy is contextual. That is, it depends to a considerable degree on the health and well-being of its people and institutions at a particular moment in time. As I have argued, democracy in Gilded Age Chicago was robust relative to today because its boundaries were constantly being tested. Today, our system is so calcified that party regulars panic at the idea of a presidential choice being decided at a convention rather than being foreordained.
I don’t have time to do that topic justice this week, so I’ll write about it next week. This week, I write about the fall-out from the Republicans’ - er, “some” Republicans’ - call for a special City Council meeting to move up the vote for mayor pro tem from their regular meeting Monday night to Saturday morning.
So.
Where were we?
Here is a link to the home page if you want to read past issues.
• Saturday night, October 28: Mayor of Chicago Carter Harrison is assassinated. Politicians and the press angle for a succession process since Chicago does not have laws to replace a mayor who dies in office.
• October 29: Hours after the Mayor’s death, newspapers start promoting their candidates for temporary Mayor.
• Monday, October 30: The World’s Fair closes. The City Council meets to prepare for the mayor’s funeral. The Chicago Tribune continues its vendetta against Governor Altgeld.
• Tuesday, October 31: The mayor lies in state at City Hall. Newspapers and politicians plan for a fight over the mayor’s seat. Attorneys look for a succession plan.
• Wednesday, November 1: Carter Harrison’s funeral. Lawyers adopt a succession plan: Aldermen will elect a temporary mayor from among them, followed a few weeks later by a special election to fill out the remaining term.
Thursday, November 2. Republican aldermen nominate George B. Swift. Alderman Epstean casts a blank ballot. Republicans call for a special City Council meeting on Saturday at 11 am, 3 hours before the Democrats’ scheduled caucus. The Dems reschedule their caucus to Friday.
Friday, November 3. The Democrats Choose a Candidate.
As they gathered at Sherman House Friday afternoon, Democratic aldermen had more on their minds than just nominating a candidate for interim mayor. They were also consternated at the news that the Republicans had moved the vote for mayor up from Monday night to Saturday morning. Some predicted that Republicans had gone too far and that this maneuver would backfire. Their most persuasive mouthpieces got to work.
“Such work would disgrace ghouls,” said John McGillen, chair of the Democratic Campaign Committee. “It will elect the democratic ticket, not only on Tuesday, but at the special election for mayor - provided they are forced to call one. It will bury the Republicans, that kind of politics.”
Democrats had not given up on winning the election on Saturday, either. All they needed to do was to persuade enough Republicans to vote with them. They only differed in what methods of persuasion might be required. The most obvious and efficient form would be bribery.
The Dems’ caucus started on an optimistic note. In chairing the meeting, Alderman Sexton declared that so many Republicans had been outraged by the meeting call that “by a dignified, steady course,” the Democrats might well get their man in on Saturday. The Republican papers would soon publish accounts of a less “dignified” course the Democrats had planned.
The Democrats’ vote was unanimous for John McGillen, the aforementioned chair of the Democratic Campaign Committee and leader in the City Council.
Who was John McGillen?
While McGillen is one of the few in this story not to merit an entry in Wikipedia (though he features in other entries, such as the 1895 Ogden Gas Scandal), he regularly made the Chicago papers as a leader of the City Council and eloquent speaker. One of my favorite lines of his was, “If we are beaten, let us be beaten, but let us not pretend to be saints when we are not saints.”
McGillen was a diehard Democrat and a gifted campaigner. Only a year into his first term as alderman, when a Democrat won the mayoral race over the incumbent Republican in 1889, McGillen was among those credited with the victory. He was 29 years old. McGillen would later be tapped to manage Carter Harrison's campaign for re-election in the Spring of '93.
McGillen’s deftness with parliamentary procedure was also frequently remarked upon. One of his favorite tactics was to adjourn a council meeting abruptly, especially if it wasn’t going his way. One newspaper, reporting on yet another potentially rancorous city council meeting, commented, “Alderman McGillen, who as an adjourner has no living equal, disbanded the Council last night after it had been in session about fifteen minutes. …"
These procedural chops would come into play in the days to come.
Then there was McGillen's unofficial alliance with Republican Martin B. Madden, who was still chafing from his loss to Swift the day before. Though they legislated across the aisle from one another, they often voted together to push utility franchises through the City Council. McGillen was one of the Democrats who tried to get the compressed gas ordinance passed in the Spring of 1892. That was the one I mentioned a couple of weeks ago where the votes were so obviously ill-gotten that 5 aldermen were indicted and sent to jail. Madden and McGillen both were scrutinized but never charged.
Madden’s friendships with McGillen and another Democratic powerhouse, Alderman (and fixer) Johnny Powers, were causing Republicans unease about the vote on Saturday and Democrats to hope they still had a chance.
The Stakes
I’ll remind you again that a consequential judicial election was taking place that following Tuesday, which would essentially be a referendum on the handling of the Haymarket affair, still fresh in everyone’s minds, since Democratic Governor Altgeld had pardoned the remaining prisoners only a few months earlier. His nemesis, the Republican Judge Gary, who had initially sentenced the anarchists, was running again for re-election. The earlier a political party could take control of the mayor’s seat, the better their chances on Tuesday.
The Tribune laid out the stakes of the mayoral vote in this blunt assessment:
[Democrats] know that if Ald. Swift is acting Mayor, Supt McCarthy or his foremen cannot drive ignorant and illiterate Italians, Poles, and Bohemians in the city’s employment to the polls Tuesday and vote them for … their judicial ticket. That is why they are alarmed. That is why the Democratic bosses are trying to purchase votes in the Council to make their man Mayor.
Some Democrats were also indulging in what one might call today a conspiracy theory, as McGillen’s earlier comments suggested: Did Republicans’ underhanded tactics in moving up the vote mean they were not above plotting to hold the mayoral seat in perpetuity? It turned out they were not above bribing Republicans, so perhaps the idea wasn’t so far-fetched.
The Republican papers (the Trib and Inter-Ocean) focused on the Dems’ “persuasion” attempts and putting to bed fears of usurpation, while the Democratic papers (the Times and Herald) argued that there’d be no Republicans to bribe if they hadn’t rushed the vote with the issuance of the call for the Saturday special meeting. As mentioned last week, Madden and his supporters had threatened to boycott the vote on Saturday, so upset were they with both the caucus and the early call. Both scenarios meant Democrats had a fighting chance to win the thing.
The Herald headlines November 4:
The Herald also reported that Republicans had formed a “vigilance committee” to keep track of the Aldermen they feared might be vulnerable to …persuasion. The Herald (and other papers) named the Aldermen: Vogt, Kamerling, Bartine, Ackerman - and Louis Epstean, the Dime Museum impresario.
The Tribune headlines:
The “foul work” to which the Trib referred involved Alderman Powers. The Trib reported:
(Democratic Alderman Johnny) Powers said he had assurances that if a ballot was forced, Ald. McGillen would get five Republican votes. It was agreed also that if in the parliamentary motions the Democrats saw that they could not win they should try to secure an adjournment and put off the selection of an acting Mayor until after the election…
“… Some of the Republican aldermen were hounded all day yesterday by Democratic workers. Inducements were held out to them to vote with the minority. One Alderman who was a Republican headquarters during the afternoon was approached by a Democratic worker, who said: “We have three Republicans who will act with us. You had better make a fourth. We will find a fifth and when we win we will not forget you.”
Inter-Ocean headlines:
The Inter-Ocean also pushed back on the “Republicans in Disarray” narrative and insisted that Republicans were incorruptible while also reporting other rumors about bribery attempts:
…Rumor had it that a large sum of money had been raised in and out of the City Hall, which money would be used to influence Republican aldermen to vote for McGillen or to stay away from the meeting this morning, thereby ensuring his election.
Meanwhile, the Times named nine Aldermen “upon whose votes [Republicans] could not safely depend.” Among those names was Epstean. They also reported on a physical altercation that happened Friday night between two Republicans, belying the Republican claims of unity:
To cap the climax of republican dissension, Ald. Mann and Ald. Madden came to blows in front of the city hall last night. They were separated by bystanders before either was badly mangled. Mann is the chief of the conspirators to grab the mayor’s chair before the crape has been removed therefrom.
Several newspapers, Democrat and Republican, quoted George B. Swift about whether he had approved the call for the early vote. He insisted he hadn’t and suggested how the meeting should be conducted the following day.
“I think it was a mistake, but I do not think the motive was the fear that the Republicans would not stick to their agreement. I have no doubt the action was almost spontaneous. Someone probably said, ‘Would it not be a good thing to have the election on Saturday?’ ‘Yes,’ and the thing was done. I am sorry it has happened, but I do not think it will make any difference in the attitude of the republicans. The proper thing, I should think, would be for the meeting to adjourn tomorrow without action.”
But the wheels had been set in motion. The parliamentary acrobatics of Chairman McGillen, the uncertainty of Dime Store impresario Epstean, and the political acuity - and short temper - of George B. Swift would all come into play the next day and in the days to come. We’ll come back to that in a couple of weeks.
Next week: The “Newspaper Trust” of 1893.