THE POPULIST MOVEMENT 68 1 



development of Free Soilism is much more radical than its 

 predecessor of 1852, which was not a bad thing in its way, 

 as it was partly the cause of the Homestead Law. 



This land movement is demanded not only for the oppressed 

 of the cities, who are to have the alternative of leaving the cities 

 and taking to the land, but also for the mortgage-laden farmers 

 of the West, who, as it would appear, are crushed under financial 

 burdens too great to be borne, under the present circumstances. 



Governor St. John during the campaign of 1894 made the 

 statement that the farmers of the country have been laboring 

 under a mortgaged indebtedness of from seven to eight billions 

 of dollars. No one could deny the statement and at the same 

 time support his denial with proof ; and it went unchallenged. 

 It was a short step from this to the declaration that the entire 

 West was staggering under the mortgages held by the moneyed 

 East, and that the farmers were the victims of a conspiracy to 

 wreck their homes and seize their farms under the guise of 

 law. These claims then entered into local politics, and their 

 influence extended until several states were ruled by the party 

 which had taken up the cry. Senators and representatives were 

 elected, through whom the matter of investigation was pressed 

 upon Congress. While the party grew rapidly, at the same time 

 the people of those states said to be most heavily embarrassed 

 found it more and more difficult to borrow money from the East. 

 This was brought about by the reaction from the statements made 

 for political effect. Capital refused to believe the conditions to 

 be any other than those thus pictured, and withdrew investments 

 as much as possible. In this way an economic question was 

 dragged into politics, and there it remained, while its importance 

 has been exaggerated by the need for political thunder. There 

 is no doubt that the mortgage occupies an important place in the 

 problems of the hour, but it is far from being a political question, 

 nor can it be settled by the interference of any party. 



A mortgage is not necessarily a disgrace or a sign of financial 

 disturbance. On the contrary it may be a means of prosperity. It 

 is only an evidence of a lack of capital on the part of one person, 

 which has been supplied by another. The loan has been made 



