William Warren Rogers, Sr. The One-Gallused Rebellion: Agrarianism in Alabama, 1865-1896.
Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2001. 376 pp. $24.95 (paper), ISBN 978-0-8173-11063.
Reviewed by Clayton E. Jewett (Department of History, Austin Community College)
Published on H-South (January, 2002)
The Failure of Political Democracy?
tent by aptly setting the stage with a discussion of the
general economic woes. Beginning in the late 1860s,
with the falling cotton prices and the exodus of black
farmers to the cities, land problems emerged in Alabama.
Many poor whites lost their land to larger landowners
and many blacks failed to become landowners. Thus, land
became concentrated in the hands of the few, and the
one-gallused increasingly struggled to hold on to small
tracts of land or drifted into share cropping. Not unique
to Alabama, the crop lien system dominated the economy. Rogers reveals that large landowners desired to
repeal the crop lien system, giving them greater control
over labor. Merchants of course favored the law and surprisingly tenant farmers and sharecroppers favored the
system because it insured them a means of obtaining necessary supplies. Rogers also discusses economic problems unique to the state, such as the scarcity of good fertilizers, the lack of agricultural information, and the theft
of agricultural products. By thoroughly detailing the intricacies of the crop lien system and a myriad of other
problems, the author reveals that the agrarian movement
represented a class struggle that would shape the economic and political future of the state.
The Failure of Political Democracy?
One-Gallused refers to those dirt-poor southern
farmers that generally owned only one pair of overalls,
held up by two galluses. Over time, one of the galluses
would wear out, leaving the farmer with one gallus to
hold up his overalls. Thus, this is the story of the poor
Alabama farmers, white and black, and their grass-roots
rebellion that not only transformed their world, but also
had a lasting impact on southern society and national
politics.
Originally published in 1970, One-Gallused Rebellion
is an unrevised paperback version with a new introduction by the author. Using primary material from
newspapers, archival sources, and unpublished works,
William Warren Rogers, Sr. examines in scrupulous detail the agrarian movement in Alabama, discussing the
Grange, the Agricultural Wheel, the Farmers’ Alliance,
and the People’s Party. Rogers argues that the agrarian
movement in Alabama initially was a non-political revolt
against economic oppression. It was only after failing to
harvest lasting economic relief that the movement turned
overtly political. It is this journey that Rogers so judiciously details. The primary thesis of this monograph, according to the author, is that the Alabama agrarian movement represented a statement and test of political democracy, especially considering the Populist call for free and
fair elections. Thus, in his view, the Populist movement
is both “universal and timeless” (p. xvii).
Politically, however, Alabama was not like other
post-Reconstruction southern states; a virtual one party
system ruled by the bourbon Democrats did not take
shape. Instead, party alignments appeared somewhat
fluid and murky. Rogers though does an excellent job
of clearing the water by detailing the oppositional roots
to the Democratic Party. The first significant attempt
Rogers begins the journey through agrarian discon1
H-Net Reviews
at organizational opposition came in the birth of the
Grange movement, a distinctly non-political organization throughout the South that appeared most prominent
at the local levels. The Grange carried the specific goal of
educating the farmers and providing social benefits. Poor
farmers became aware on a larger scale of the economic
difficulties in the state, and educated on improved farming methods, crop diversification, and wage labor.
attracted not only the small farmers and sharecroppers,
but also large farmers and ministers (especially Baptists).
Though the Alliance also cut across racial lines, it remained weakest in the black belt. Unlike previous organizations, however, the failed economic ventures of
the Alliance served only to strengthen the organization,
which alarmed Democrats.
The enduring strength of county based Alliances,
which generally adopted the Ocala Platform and hinted
at forming a third political party, frightened the
Democrats. Redeemers viewed political opposition as
a threat to white supremacy, and feared the emergence
of “Negro rule” should whites in Alabama become divided between the parties. By 1892, the one-gallused
masses threw down the gauntlet by advocating the formation of a third party. In Alabama, a significant step
in this process came in the formation of the Jeffersonian
Democrats, led by Kolb. This attempt at a third party did
not achieve political success, due primarily to political
corruption. In their attempt to maintain political control and white supremacy, bourbon Democrats resorted
to unprecedented political fraud. Such methods included
stealing ballot boxes, stuffing ballot boxes, controlling
The next stage in the process involved the formation the black vote through intimidation, and blatantly changof the Alabama State Agricultural Society in the early ing the voting returns in several counties. Without a
1880s. It emerged about the time the Grange lost ground.
constitutional provision to contest elections at the state
Though its leaders were committed Democrats, the socilevel, Kolb and other Populist politicians could do little
ety was far from being political. It stressed scientific agri- but swallow defeat and remain determined.
culture and education, generally focusing on the plight of
poor white farmers. As the one-gallused clamored for poIt is here in the state elections that Rogers is at his best
litical action, partly because the society never really rep- by revealing the intricate political loyalties and the poresented the average farmer, they lost interest in the so- litical game playing. While Jeffersonian Democrats and
ciety and gravitated toward the Agricultural Wheel and Populists were separate in name, both groups counted on
Farmers’ Alliance. Though the society also failed to exact the other for political support in specific counties. Rogers
lasting economic relief, its significance is found in elevat- also does a superb job of revealing that in some areas of
ing to prominence a new agrarian leader, Reuben F. Kolb, Alabama, the Jeffersonian Democrats fused with Repubwho the author describes as “the single most important lican factions to mount a legitimate threat to the bourfigure in Alabama’s agrarian revolution” (p. 100).
bon Democrats. In addition, many disillusioned bourbon
Democrats defected to the Jeffersonians or Populists. In
By the late 1880s, the society gave way to the Agriculthis whole process, though, political ties were fragile at
tural Wheel and the Farmers’ Alliance. Of the two, the
best; Jeffersonian Democrats, Populists, and Republicans
Wheel appeared more class conscious, appealing to the all appeared apprehensive about fusion. However unsmall, oppressed farmers and railing against monopoly easy these ties might have been, Rogers makes clear that
and oppression. It advocated co-operative stores and Democratic opponents were the victims of fraud and opmanufacturing. It challenged the railroads, the Interstate pression, defeated by the corrupt bourbon machinery.
Commerce Commission and the state legislature for economic relief. In addition, the Wheel in Alabama was sigBy 1894, the Jeffersonian Democrats led by Kolb,
nificant because it cut across party and racial lines. Un- and the Populists in Alabama merged to challenge the
successful in its attempts to remedy the economic woes Democrats in state elections. This did not mean though
of the small farmers, though, the Wheel merged with the the Populists were without their troubles. Fusion with
Alliance in 1888. The Alliance had a broader appeal; it Republicans alienated many white farmers, Kolb and
Nevertheless, the Grange failed to bring about lasting
economic relief. Rogers attributes its failure to the lack
of a distinct economic program (it blamed the merchant
and retailing middlemen but offered no clear solution except going into business itself by establishing cooperatives that failed due to mismanagement and fraud), its
concentration on fairs, and the fact that large landowners controlled the organization. The Grange in Alabama,
he argues, while serving an important function, did not
have a strong base of support. Nevertheless, the Grange
was significant because for the first time educational and
social benefits were offered to the poor farmers and they
became cognizant of the large scale economic problems
and potential solutions.
2
H-Net Reviews
other leaders remained divided on how to best deal with
the black belt and the black vote, and many questioned
accepting the support of free silver Democrats. At times,
reveals Rogers, the agrarian movement seemed unsure of
itself.
direct election of senators, women’s suffrage, governmental regulation of the railroads and business, the subtreasury plan, and the resulting “political oblivion” for
southern blacks (p. 333) We know that the majority of
Populist goals were met during the Wilson and FDR administrations. Furthermore, examining the rhetoric of
Though the Populists mounted a strong campaign for
later political contests, we see that politicians continue
free silver, and open and honest elections, again they
to make at least a nod to the one-gallused masses. Given
were outdone by their oppressors in the 1896 state and these results, the Populists do appear somewhat timeless.
national elections. Rogers reveals that the Democrats One can only smile and wonder, however, what Kolb and
in Alabama stole Populist principles, nominated strong the Populists would have thought and done about the
candidates, unfurled the banner of white supremacy, and Kennedy, Nixon, and George W. Bush elections.
stole black votes. In addition, the split Bryan ticket, and
the defection of Kolb to support the Democrat’s BryanWhile Rogers provides the most thorough account to
Sewall ticket over the Populist’s Bryan-Watson ticket, date of the agrarian movement in Alabama, his analysis
left the Alabama agrarian movement without a leader. is straight out of the Progressive school of thought, and
Though in later years the Populists would continue to thus somewhat dated. In addition, we could learn more
play a small role in Alabama politics, their defeat at the about the tactics used by the Populists to gain black votes,
state and national level in 1896 signaled the downfall and about politics in the Alabama black communities.
of the party and an end to the agrarian movement in Nevertheless, this study is an excellent example to hisAlabama. The one-gallused never again threatened the torians wishing to study the intricacies of political alignsupremacy of the bourbon Democrats.
ments and factors influencing state politics; a must read
for every scholar interested in state politics, economics,
Rogers ends the monograph with a short summation and agrarian discontent.
of the enduring Populist influence: the income tax, the
If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at:
https://networks.h-net.org/h-south
Citation: Clayton E. Jewett. Review of Rogers, William Warren, Sr., The One-Gallused Rebellion: Agrarianism in
Alabama, 1865-1896. H-South, H-Net Reviews. January, 2002.
URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=5815
Copyright © 2002 by H-Net, all rights reserved. H-Net permits the redistribution and reprinting of this work for
nonprofit, educational purposes, with full and accurate attribution to the author, web location, date of publication,
originating list, and H-Net: Humanities & Social Sciences Online. For any other proposed use, contact the Reviews
editorial staff at [email protected].
3