Our Graphical History Tour returns to Iowa in 1926
![]() |
| "Making a Banquet for the Democrats" by J.N. "Ding" Darling in Des Moines Register, June 4, 1926 |
If you were on the Tour when we welcomed "Ding" Darling back to his drawing board in April, you may remember Senator Smith Wildman Brookhart, a Progressive Republican whose 1924 election win was overturned by his fellow Senators almost a year and a half after Iowans had cast their votes. The Republicans in the majority decided that they would rather add Daniel Steck to the Democratic minority than continue suffering Brookhart in their own caucus.
Brookhart, wielding an axe on the left in Darling's cartoon, immediately announced that he would challenge Iowa's other Senator, Republican Albert Cummins (with the sword in the foreground). Darling includes a third Republican candidate, Howard Clark, a banker who offered himself as a compromise candidate.
![]() |
| "Why Good Men Don't Go In For Politics" by J.N. "Ding" Darling in Des Moines Register, June 6, 1926 |
The leading two candidates ran a bitter race for the time. The incumbent campaigned on a motto of "Cummins or Communism”; Brookhart complained that a railroads bill Cummins had co-sponsored benefited Wall Street at farmers' expense.
![]() |
| "Well, Now Where To" by Ed LeCocq in Des Moines Evening Tribune, June 8, 1926 |
When the sun came up after election day, Brookhart had bested the rest of the field, winning just over 50% of Republicans' votes. (Senator Cummins died the next month at age 75; attorney David Stewart was appointed to serve out the remaining months of Cummins's term.)
![]() |
| "Hoeing His Own Row" by Bill Sykes in Life, June 3, 1926 |
Brookart's victory was widely seen as a rebuke to Republicans and the Coolidge administration for shelving the McNary-Haugen Farm Relief Bill, a central theme of Brookhart's campaign. Responding to a post-war drop in the price of American farm crops, the bill's sponsors, both Republicans, proposed having the federal government buy a set amount from farmers to sell at a loss.
![]() |
| "He Don't Know Nothin' About Hosses" by J.P. Alley in Memphis Commercial Appeal, June 9, 1926 |
McNary-Haugen was opposed by laissez-faire business interests, predominantly in eastern states, as costing money, involving the government in business, and encouraging farmers to reduce production. Big business and the railroad magnates further objected to the bill's endorsement of farmers banding together in cooperatives to negotiate commodities price levels.
![]() |
| "Now, Consarn Ye, Don't Go Hog-Wild" by J.P. Alley in Memphis Commercial Appeal, June 10, 1926 |
Smith Brookhart, by the way, was a staunch advocate of Prohibition, although cartoonists overlooked that aspect of his election; Cummins and Clark supported it, too.
Prohibition had been more of an issue in the primary elections in Pennsylvania in May (we visited them here).
![]() |
| "The Biggest Parade Yet" by Jesse Cargill for Central Press Assn., ca. June 16, 1926 |
Campaign spending on the Pennsylvania primaries prompted congressional hearings in June, as it was revealed to have reached levels unheard of to that date.
Jesse Cargill's cartoon recalls the previously unprecedented spending by Republican Truman H. Newberry in his 1918 primary race against Henry Ford for Michigan's Senate seat. Newberry's conviction for having spent ten times the maximum legal amount of $10,000 allowed under the Corrupt Practices Act was overturned by the Supreme Court, on the grounds that the federal government had no authority to regulate partisan primary elections. Newberry ended up resigning from the Senate in 1922, anyway.
![]() |
| "Late Primary Returns" by Nelson Harding in Brooklyn Daily Eagle, June 16, 1926 |
Nelson Harding rests this cartoon on the actual dollar amounts reportedly spent by the Republican gubernatorial and senatorial candidates. If they seem almost quaint today, I'd note that they dwarf Mr. Newberry's expenditures to insignificance.
Adjusted for inflation, the 2026 amounts would be $20,885,171 by Pepper-Fisher, $11,221,269 by Vare-Beidelman, and $3,668,864 by Pinchot.
![]() |
| "And They All Chipped In" by Rollin Kirby in New York World, ca. June 28, 1926 |
While a main focus of the Pennsylvania primaries was on the issue of Prohibition, Rollin Kirby did not spare criticism of the Manufacturers Association. (It should also be noted that the majority of Gov. Gifford Pinchot's campaign expenditures came from his own very deep pockets.)
And since we're updating earlier History Tour stops...
![]() |
| John T. McCutcheon in Chicago Tribune, June 11, 1926 |
The governments of Great Lakes states from Wisconsin to Ohio opposed a plan to connect Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River through Chicago's sanitary district canal. Arguing in its favor, the Chicago Tribune concluded that "it becomes increasingly difficult to find any motive behind their antagonism other than a great sectional selfishness."
"Among all the voices raised against the Mississippi valley waterway proposal, those of Michigan and Ohio have perhaps been the loudest. The Mississippi valley states are constrained to wonder whether it is entirely coincidence that Michigan and Ohio, are, of all the central western states, the most advantageously placed in relation to the St. Lawrence route to the sea, their ports of Toledo and Detroit standing at the head of Lake Erie, obviating the need of passing around the whole state of Michigan, as must ships from Illinois, Indiana, western Michigan, and Wisconsin ports.
"It seems strange indeed that Wisconsin, Indiana, and western Michigan are not with the Mississippi valley on the side of the waterway. ... Their natural route to the sea is by way of the Mississippi, not the St. Lawrence. The valley states search for their reason and find nothing but the Chicago diversion — a five inch lowering of the lake levels out of a total lowering of almost three feet."
![]() |
| Wm. Donahey in Cleveland Plain Dealer, June 12, 1926 |
The Cleveland Plain Dealer countered,
"Advocates of the rivers and harbors bill now pending in the senate, which authorizes the improvement of the Illinois river and by clear implication recognizes the legality of Chicago's attack on the level of the lakes, try constantly to make it appear that opponents are opposed to a waterway from Lake Michigan to the gulf. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
"Every speaker representing the interests threatened by Chicago's continued extraction of water has made it plain that the fight of Ohio and other lake states is not against a lakes-to-gulf canal but is against a policy which for twenty-five years has been raiding the commerce of the lakes...
"This rivers and harbors bill as it passed the house over the protest of practically every member of the lake district, except those from Illinois, is almost a perfect example of pork barrel legislation."
In another editorial, the Tribune attacked what it called "the Ohio gang," which the Plain Dealer presumed meant diversion opponents Senator Frank Willis and Rep. Theodore Burton.
"For some years, Ohio has been the brat of the American family," the Tribune fulminated, "overfed and dirty. If Congress can't wash its ears and keep it in its place, the Mississippi valley will see that the effects are felt in Congress."
![]() |
| "You Can't Blame the Children" by Jesse Cargill for Central Press Assn., ca. June 19, 1926 |
Canadian editorial cartoonists who had weighed in against Chicago's lakes-to-gulf canal in earlier stops of our Graphical History Tour were silent on the U.S. Congress's Rivers and Harbors bill in June, distracted by other matters. We'll turn to their issues later this month.
![]() |
| "Liable to Get His Feet Wet" by Sam Hunter in Toronto Daily Star, June 11, 1926 |
Although Sam Hunter did take a moment to keep Toronto readers apprised of that Iowa senate primary.















































