Book Review

Reliving the "Hornet's Nest":Ê
James B. Weaver and the Election of 1880

Thomas S. Mach
Cedarville University

With The Civil War's Last Campaign, Mark Lause has filled an important and long standing void related to work on James B. Weaver and the Greenback-Labor Party (GLP). His title encapsulates the overriding theme that neither before nor after the 1880 election did four Civil War generals Ð James A. Garfield, Winfield S. Hancock, James B. Weaver, and Neal Dow Ð "face each other in such a clear-cut conflict over the course of the Union. It became, in many ways, the Civil War's last campaign" (iii). In a year in which an astounding 78.4 percent of the electorate voted, Garfield won the closely contested race over Hancock, with Weaver garnering just over 300,000 votes, much less than anticipated for the Greenbacker. In the course of tracing the GLP's role in the election, Lause highlights the ingenuity of Weaver's campaign methods, his indefatigable fight against fusion with either major party, his battle to unite the disparate interests within the GLP, his means of addressing the continuing political conflicts based on race and section, and his Populist and Progressive legacy, which still informs American society today. Because his close examination of Weaver and the complex factionalism of the GLP is so excellent, it is disappointing that Lause does not adequately place the events of 1880 within the broader context of Gilded Age political realities.

1

Not since Frederick Haynes' work in 1919 has Weaver been the primary focus of such a monograph. More interpretive and often more accurate then Haynes, Lause concentrates almost exclusively on Weaver's actions in the 1880 election and his singular role in unifying the party.1 Lause is at his best when discussing the complicated interplay between various groups of greenbackers, laborers, socialists, communists, suffragists and reformers. More generally, Lause categorizes the diverse members of the organization into three groups he defines as conservative, pragmatic or radical (19-20). Their influence on the party, either toward unity or disunity, comprise a foundational theme woven throughout the book. Clearly, Lause dispels the notion, all too commonly portrayed in textbooks, that the GLP was a monolithic, one-issue movement. Lause's sophisticated presentation of the Greenbackers portrays them as a coalition of segments of society attempting to address the issue of political relevancy in a changing economic, social and political milieu. At the same time, Lause unflinchingly shows the centripetal factors seeking to propel the various assemblies from under the party umbrella. In the process, Weaver stands out as the one figure behind whom these distinct groups could unify. His portrait of Weaver the politician is complete as is the depiction of his pivotal role of fighting to keep the party free from fusionist entanglements.

. . .