J. Rogers Hollingsworth

Joseph Rogers Hollingsworth's book is an examination of the leadership of the Democratic Party from Grover Cleveland's triumph in 1892 through a succession of electoral defeats leading up their disastrous collapse in the 1904 election. Hollingsworth sees the inability of successive party leaders to make the logical and sensible judgments that would have bridged the gap between the conservative and liberal wings of the party as the reason for this failure. The genesis for this lay in Cleveland's reelection; though an honest and courageous political leader, Hollingsworth argues that the experiences of his career hardened into dogma his belief that principles rather than political parties were the indispensable component of good government. As a result, when dealing with the currency, his commitment to the gold standard rather than bimetallism alienated the silver Democrats and labor, prohibiting compromise and fracturing the party.

Cleveland's dogmatism opened the way for William Jennings Bryan's emergence as the party's leader in 1896. Yet Bryan's own intellectual inflexibility in favor of silver coinage prevented the party from adopting a more accommodating stance on the issue, alienating the gold Democrats and ensuring the party's disorganization and distrust by voters nationally. Bryan's direction on imperialism issues only exacerbated these problems; though an anti-imperialist, his support for a treaty in which the U.S. annexed the Philippines hobbled efforts to establish a clear stance on the issue. The situation reached its nadir with the 1904 election; while the gold Democrats regained control of their party, their poor campaign against an popular incumbent led to an overwhelming defeat in the polls. It was only then, Hollingsworth, concludes, that the party was able finally to move past the divisive silver issue and reestablish a unity that would return them to national power.

Though dated, Hollingsworth's book remains a useful study of the Democratic Party during an era of change in party politics. Though his analysis is insufficient in itself, it does help explain how American politics moved from an era of relative national parity between Democrats and Republicans to one of Republican political dominance. It also gives weight to Will Rogers' famous quip about how, as a Democrat, he belonged to no organized political party. Given that he came of political age during this period, it's easy to see how the statement could have been born from this experience.… (more)