This Week's Sneak Peek

I drew a different cartoon last week, which led my better half to think that I didn't have to draw another one last night. The problem is, I can't tell you when — or if — the first cartoon will ever see the light of publication.

For some time now, I have wondered what my editorial cartoonist colleagues and I will draw when the day comes that the Grim Reaper comes for Donald TanTrump and doesn't take "You're crooked and stupid!" or his stomping away for an answer.

Well, the other night, my idea for that fateful day came to me, and I decided that I had better commit it to ink and bristol board before I forgot it. Besides, there's always the chance that the fateful day will come over some weekend when I'm far away from my drawing board. Or that the official announcement will come when my deadline is seconds away; my cartoon is really dialogue-heavy, with six panels, and inking all those letters takes time.

The dialogue isn't 100% inked. One line of the dialogue refers to Trump as having been impeached twice. He may well have been impeached four or five times before mortality finally catches up with him.

Who knows whether I'll even still be drawing cartoons by then? My hands shake a little these days, and I'm not getting any younger, either.

When It's Least Expected, You're Elected

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's primary win was another in a series of rebukes by the party faithful to one aspect or another of Coolidge administration policies. 

"Lotsa Pep" by Dorman H. Smith for Newspaper Enterprise Assn., ca. June 12, 1926

Brookhart, by the way, was a staunch advocate of Prohibition, although cartoonists overlooked that aspect of his election; Cummins and Clark supported it, too, and Coolidge was pledged to enforce it. Prohibition, rather than agricultural subsidies, had been the dominant issue in the primary elections in Pennsylvania in May (we visited them here). 

But now Quaker State Republicans had a new issue.

"The Biggest Parade Yet" by Jesse Cargill for Central Press Assn., ca. June 16, 1926

Reflecting new electioneering methods of the 20th Century, 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...

"Not Very Neighborly" by 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."

"While Rip Van Winkle Snores" by Hal 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.

Q Toon: $250 Bill of Sale

A pair of Trump lackeys in the Treasury Department came up with the brilliant scheme to put Donald Trump's face on a new $250 bill, ostensibly to mark the nation's 250th birthday this summer. But really because adding Trump's signature to all our paper money and minting a special gold-plated dollar coin with Trump scowling at whomever had the misfortune to end up with one just wasn't enough.

They hired a British guy to design the portrait for the bill (I might have recommended the New York courtroom sketch artist from Trump's fraud trial, but they didn't ask me), and Trump's ever so servile Treasury Secretary presented the a mock-up of the bill to the nation as if he were announcing a sign from heaven above.

Now, the chances of the Donald Lookitme! Lookitme! Trump $250 bill being approved by the U.S. Congress, given that living persons are not allowed to be on U.S. currency, are thinner than an earthworm's mustache.

No living person has appeared on U.S. currency since 1866, when it was outlawed after the image of a mid-level Treasury bureaucrat showed up on a 5-cent note. Legislation that would allow Trump to appear on a $250 bill was introduced in Congress last year to commemorate the nation’s 250th anniversary but has languished.

There is also the slight problem that federal law mandates what banknote denominations the Treasury Department is authorized to produce, and $250 is not one of them.

Treasury employees who pointed out the obstacles to getting any Trump commemorative $250 bill out in time for the nation's sesquiquincentennial found themselves transferred to janitorial duties at the Adak, Alaska field office.

In any event, there are too many primaried Republican congressmen and senators who no longer have any political reason to suck up to Dear Leader before their forced retirement next January.

Must've Been the Last Straw

Oh, well. I'm sure DJ Trump's Freedom 250 party mix will have the national mall groovin' and swayin'.

Anyway, here's this week's sneak peek:

✍

Our Foreign Desk

"The World 'Do' Move" by Dean O'Dell in Dayton Daily News, May 18, 1926

This week's Graphical History Tour takes a quick look overseas to catch up with events in the rest of the world in May of 1926.

Well, Europe and North Africa, at least.

"Rolling Up His Sleeves" by Fred Ellis in Daily Worker, Chicago, May 5, 1926

That May started off with a general strike in Great Britain, to the alarm of commie-fearing cartoonists, but to the delight of their cohorts at the Daily Worker. 

An editorial in London Daily Mail called the general strike revolutionary and subversive, sparking a walk-out by its pressmen.

"A May Day Moving That Will Move" by Arthur G. Racey in Montreal Daily Star, May 1, 1926

The U.S. had a hand in exacerbating issues for British miners. It its effort to stabilize the German economy, the Dawes Plan for Europe subsidized Germany's coal industry; that in turn enabled Germany to provide free coal to France and Italy under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. As a result of this and overvaluation of the Pound Sterling, British coal exports plummeted and miners' pay was slashed by 35%.

"I Always Bring Trouble" by Daniel Fitzpatrick in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 6, 1926

Meanwhile, working conditions in British coal mines were still basically pre-industrial. Whereas German and Polish mining firms had invested in mechanization, the British companies relied exclusively on manual labor.

"Why the Strikes" by T.E. Powers in New York Evening Journal, ca. May 8, 1926

Miners laid down their tools on May 1; the Trade Union Congress (TUC) called on all other workers to join them beginning at midnight May 3. 1.5 million workers from all over Great Britain joined the strike on the first day.

"Streik in England" by Wilhelm Schulz in Simplicissimus, Munich/Stuttgart, May 24, 1926

In response, the government sent police to escort busloads of strikebreakers to the mines and other affected industries, and posted troops at bus stations to ward off violent resistance. London's bus system was immediately overwhelmed. After a week or so, some striking workers began breaking the picket lines. Historian Jessica Brain takes it from there:

"The turning point came when the general strike was identified as not being protected by the Trade Dispute Act of 1906, except for the coal industry, meaning that the unions became liable for the intention to breach contracts. By 12th May, the TUC General Council met at Downing Street, to announce that the strike was being called off with the agreement that no striker would be victimised for their decision, despite the government stating it had no control over employers’ decisions.

"The momentum had been lost, unions faced potential legal action and workers were returning to their place of employment. Some miners continued to resist for as long as November, but to no avail.

"Many miners faced unemployment for years whilst others had to accept the bad conditions of lower wages and longer working hours. Despite incredible levels of support, the strike had amounted to nothing.

"The Sincerest of Flattery" by Dorman H. Smith for Newspaper Enterprise Assn., ca. May 22, 1926

"In 1927 the Trade Disputes Act was introduced by [Prime Minister] Stanley Baldwin, an act which banned any sympathy strikes as well as mass picketing; this act is still in force today. This was the final nail in the coffin for those workers who had taken part in one of the biggest events in industrial history in Britain."

"Gehnsucht" by Arthur Krüger in Kladderadatsch, Berlin, June 6, 1926

On May 11, Poland's former Chief of State, First Marshal Józef Klemens Piłsudski, launched a successful coup d'état against the newly elected Polish government of President Stanisław Wojciechowski and Prime Minister Wincenty Witos, the third administration in the previous six months.

"Polen" by Ernst Thöny in Simplicissimus, Munich/Stuttgart, May 31, 1926

Units of the Army loyal to Piłsudski quickly seized control of the major bridges in Warsaw. The Polish Socialist Party called for a general strike in support of the coup. The Railwaymen's Union brought transportation and communications to a standstill, and the government surrendered on May 14 to prevent further bloodshed.

"Clean-up Week Idea Reaches Poland" by Wm. Hanny in Philadelphia Inquirer,May 27, 1926

At first blush, Hanny's cartoon appears to side with the coup, but he was actually referring to the name given to the new government by its principal leader. Piłsudski announced the creation of what he called a moral "Sanation" (Sanacja) dictatorship. In English newspaper reports:

"Marshal Pilsudski has stated that the policy of the Government immediately is for the restoration of the authority of the State and the introduction of administrative reforms, including the suppression of corruption in public life. He promises to hold a general election after the dissolution of Parliament. In the meantime he claims that only Presidential endorsement shall be required in order to enforce the law. He declares that his sole desire is to save Poland from the reaction of military operations which are not directed against the State or the people. I am, he said, fighting the Government, which since it assumed office has inaugurated a policy of defiance to the interests of the State and the army."

"Pan Pilsudki Imitating Senor Mussolini" possibly by Viktor "Deni" Denisov in Pravda, Moscow, ca. May 22, 1926

The Daily Worker gave no credit for this cartoon, so I am guessing its creator based on the style of the drawing (and overlooking the Roman rather than Cyrillic alphabet on Piłsudski's banner, which might have been used for a variety of reasons).

"Pilsudsky's In the Saddle But Where's the Horse" by J.N. "Ding" Darling in Des Moines Register, May 29, 1926

"Ding" Darling offered a different view of the Polish coup, but the anonymous cartoonist above hit closer to the mark. While Piłsudski never assumed a role as the titular head of state, he remained the real power behind the Polish government until his death in 1935.

Moving on:

"Frühlingslied in Morokko" by Werner Hahmann in Kladderadatsch, Berlin, May 30. 1926

Moroccan rebel leader Abd el-Krim surrendered to Spanish and French forces on May 27, 1926, bringing an end to the five-year-long Rif War (which we have been following here, here, here, and here) and the Al-Jumhūriyyah al-Rif. 

by Daniel Fitzpatrick in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 27, 1926

Despite some early successes against the Spanish army, el-Krim’s 9,000 to 13,000 guerillas were no match for the Europeans once France entered the war in support of Spain in September, 1925. Spanish forces re-occupied el-Krim’s home base of Ajdir that October; by March, 1926, the Franco-Spanish armies had gained control of most of Morocco.

"The Triumph" by Ed Gale in Los Angeles Times, May 28, 1926

El-Krim sued for peace in April; but talks collapsed, and the Europeans resumed hostilities. El-Krim was left with no option but to surrender to the French, who promised his safety and that of his family in exchange for the safe return of Spanish and French prisoners of war. El-Krim lived out the rest of his days in exile on Réunion in the Indian Ocean.

"Abd-el-Krim" by Ernst Thöny in Simplicissimus, Munich/Stuttgart, June 21, 1926

As far as some Americans were concerned, the principal outcome of the Europeans' victory was that France could now focus her attention on her dismal economic situation. And, by the way, repaying those wartime debts to the U.S.

"A Stitch in Time—Maybe" by Cecil Jensen in Los Angeles Illustrated Daily News, May 28, 1926

Q Toon: Remembering Barney Frank

I promised to draw a memorial cartoon for the late Congressman Barney Frank, the first gay member of Congress to out himself, and here it is. 

The quotation in my cartoon is from a January 12, 2009 New Yorker article by Jeffrey Toobin, and it's a slightly condensed version of a statement Barney Frank had made on the House floor the previous March.

It's important to point out that in 2009, none of the rights he was advocating for — marriage equality, the end of "Don't Ask Don't Tell," or Employment Non-Discrimination — were yet the law of the land. And none of them came about by acts of Congress, meaning that any of them could be negated by an antigay president, Supreme Court, or Secretary of Whatever They're Calling What We're Doing In Iran These Days.

Barney Frank made these statements in response to Republicans who charged that advocating these rights was "radical" (a boiler plate response by Republicans to any Democratic proposal, even those that borrow from Republican ones).

But Frank was an incrementalist, which resulted in attacks from the idealists and purists to his left. Transgender advocates are still upset by his willingness to excise them from the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in order to get Congress to pass workplace protections for lesbians, gays, and bisexuals — a ploy that failed anyway.

He was defensive about that in his final interview, with Lou Chibarro, Jr. in Washington Blade, but confident that the protections afforded by Bostock v. Clayton County would stand:

Blade: Are you saying we may not need an LGBTQ non-discrimination act by Congress for the states that haven’t passed that?

Frank: I would be in favor of that, yes. But again, I think you and I – you have always been pessimistic. There is a political time now that works in our favor. And as I said, on abortion, they burned themselves very badly on abortion. And yes, I’m still for a national anti-discrimination bill. But I do not think the right wing wants to be caught taking rights away that already exist. Because that’s a lot harder than denying them in the first place. And I don’t see any movement for that. You tell me what you are worried about. What bills are you worried about? 

Blade: I was simply saying they haven’t yet passed a federal non-discrimination bill. 

Frank: No, what’s going to change on the Supreme Court? I don’t see a pretty quick reversal on the Supreme Court. So, I think people are just – they have to have a cause. And they are inflating the likelihood that we are going to lose some rights when I see no evidence of it. And in fact, I see a lot of political reasons why those in Congress don’t want to do that.

Perhaps he was correct that "people's rights to get married, join the army, and make a living" are mainstream values now.

That assumes that there is a "mainstream" any more.

"The left and the right live in parallel universes. The right listens to talk radio, the left's on the internet, and they just reinforce one another. They have no sense of reality." ― Barney Frank

Memorial Day's Sneak Peek

I mentioned somewhere in Saturday's Graphical History Tour post what I intended to draw about this week; so instead of a snippet from my forthcoming editorial cartoon, here's one from 100 Memorial Days ago.

"Memorial Day" by Guy R. Spencer in Omaha World-Herald, May 30, 1926

Sadly, 100 years later, its encomium that "none was sacrificed for national greed or aggression" no longer applies.