only leave them one thing which is sure to be a blessing, namely, a good government. Leave them a government which, instead of giving favors to a few at the expense of the many, will protect every citizen in the enjoyment of life, of liberty and in the pursuit of happiness, and you leave your children the richest possible heritage.

The cities have not felt the pinch of the gold standard as quickly as the country has, and when you, mothers and wives, are enjoying the comforts of life-if you have still escaped-I beg you to give one moment's thought to the mothers and wives throughout this land whose lot has been made harder and whose life has been made darker by the gold standard. You may read its history and you will find that the gold standard never brought a ray of hope to those who sat in darkness; never gave inspiration or aid to those who are disheartened. According to Mr. Carlisle, when he spoke in 1878, the consummation of the scheme to destroy one-half the money of the world would ultimately entail upon the human race more misery than has been wrought by all the wars, pestilences and famines that have ever occurred in the history of the world. I believe that he was right. Enter, if you will, into the homes of the land and see how the living expenses have been cut down because other expenses could not be cut down. See how prices have fallen while debts, taxes and other fixed charges have refused to fall. Go into the home where the mortgage is being foreclosed-where the husband and wife started out with the laudable ambition to own a home, paid down what they had saved with the expectation of being able to pay the balance, but which the gold standard, with its rising dollar and its falling prices, has made it impossible to pay. Multiply this case by the number of such cases and then remember, my friends, that all that these families have lost has been gained by those who hold fixed investments, who trade in money and profit by the adversities of the people.

The gold standard has been tried in this country for twenty years and yet no party has ever declared it to be good. It has been tried in Germany, and Prince Bismarck tells you in a recent letter that he is in favor of bimetallism. If the gold standard has been a blessing to Germany, why does Prince Bismarck desire to go back to bimetallism? Prince Bismarck speaks for the great mass of the people. Only a little more than a year ago they passed through the Reichstag a resolution declaring in favor of the restoration of bimetallism, but the Berlin Chamber of Commerce declared against it. So it is everywhere. If you will take from the gold standard the support of the monied classes it cannot stand for a day in any nation which now has it. The gold standard has never been supported by the masses; it has never received the endorsement of the creators of wealth. It has been fastened upon the people by the drones of society, not by the bees who make the honey.

Let me suggest a way in which you can detect truth from error in this case. What do our opponents talk about? The gold standard? Oh, no. They talk about sound money. Now you know human nature, and you know that a man never uses an ambiguous phrase when a clear one will express the meaning, if he desires to have the meaning expressed. You do not use ambiguous phrases when you talk to your friends. You do not use language in a double sense when you desire to be understood. It is only when you are evading questions and dodging issues that you use language which can be con

DULUTH

strued in any way. When you find advocates of the gold standard using the phrase "sound money" instead of the gold standard, you may rest assured that they use the phrase because it sounds better than the gold standard. You hear them talking about honest money; why do they not tell us what they mean by honest money? We desire honest money and we believe that we are advocating a dollar more nearly honest than the gold dollar under a gold standard. We say that we want the free coinage of silver, the unlimited coinage of silver, coinage at 16 to 1 and coinage immediately, without waiting for the aid or consent of any other nation. We tell you what we want, why we want it and how we expect to secure it, and I believe that those who have confidence enough in the people to elaborate their plans before the people, have more claim upon the confidence of the people than those who expect the people to trust them, but who will not themselves trust the people.

Sometimes our opponents say that, even if demonetization is wrong, it is unwise to go back to bimetallism. It is not simply a question of going back. We have not reached the end of the gold standard yet; we have simply commenced; we are just getting a good start in the direction of the gold standard. We are not upon a gold standard level, we are on a decline. If you say that it is wrong to take from gold some of its purchasing power, I reply that the question is not whether we shall leave gold purchasing the same that it does now. The question is whether we will take out of the gold some of its purchasing power or go on crowding into gold more and more purchasing power. If you say that it is not fair to pay back a dollar which will buy less than the dollar borrowed, I reply that if you are advocating the gold standard you are advocating a system which makes every man who borrows money pay back a larger dollar than he borrowed. If you demand exact equity you must be willing to do equity.

I repeat that we are on a declining plane; that we are going down, and that under the gold standard gold will be made dearer still, for every nation that goes to the gold standard will increase the demand for gold, and every new demand for gold will raise the purchasing power of an ounce of gold and depress prices. The result will be that when nation after nation has joined in this crusade for gold, we shall simply compel all mankind to bid for that metal, and the one who offers the most of the products of his toil will secure the metal until some one bids more than he. Under the gold standard, joined in by all the nations, the moment a little gold goes out of the country commerce will be at a standstill, and you must either issue bonds and bring gold back or lower prices and bring it back in that way, and the moment it comes back there will be a struggle among other nations to get it from us again. The gold standard simply means that commerce will always be agitated and the few who hold the money of the world will be able to loan it first to one nation and then to another, and thus gather in all the fruits of those who toil, while the masses of the people will be hewers of wood and haulers of water receiving each year less consideration and enjoying less of comfort than they did the year before.

Do you think that this condition can last? No, my friends, no condition of bondage was ever permanent. The taskmaster has always thought that his supremacy would be safe if he could only stop the complaint of those who served under him, but you cannot stop the complaint until you take away the cause of complaint. The taskmaster is never wise enough to see that agita

tion will exist while there is cause for dissatisfaction. Do you tell me that the gold standard can be made permanent? I must change my opinion of the Almighty's love before I can believe that he intended the great majority of the human race to toil while a few grow fat by despoiling them. Do you tell me that civilization must result in driving the extremes of society farther apart? No, it cannot be so. When we talk about the common people-and by them we mean the great mass of people who do not assume a superiority over others —we are called demagogues, and yet, my friends, the common people have given to the world all that it has of good. The common people have brought to society all that is valuable. Every reform has come up from the people, it has never come down from the well-to-do of society.

If you ask me why, I point to a wiser than any human teacher. When the Nazarene gave to His disciples the parable of the sower, and spoke of the seed that fell where the thorns sprang up and choked it, He explained that He meant that the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choked the truth. It has always been so. The cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches have always choked the truth. The truth has not come from those who did not suffer, it has not come from those who were above want; the great movements for the benefit of society have come from those who needed to have society improved and their needs have been the stimulus to their actions.

Do not despise these people who complain of their condition. The Bible tells us that when Christ preached, those who devoured widows' houses would have turned Him away, but that the common people heard Him gladly. And yet, my friends, it is the common people who today are accused of being incapable of self-government. I assert that the common people of this nation are the only ones who will defend Democratic institutions. It is the common people who appreciate our form of government; it is the common people who produce the wealth of the nation in time of peace, and it is the common people, and they alone, who in time of war are willing to offer their lives in their nation's defense. Do not ignore them; do not doubt their capacity for self-government; do not question their good intent; do not say that they have no cause for complaint when they ask for relief. Our opponents declare that we are opposed to the enforcement of law. We who stand upon the Chicago platform and who declare in favor of arbitration instead of force are the lovers of peace and order. We believe that the principles of justice administered in our courts can also be administered by boards of arbitration, and we believe that those who have a just cause ought to be willing to submit that cause to impartial arbitrators and abide the result. It is only error that shuns the court and seeks to substitute might for right.

I only came to speak to you for a moment, but the presence of so many and the interest manifested by you have caused me to talk longer than I intended. I beg you to realize that we are passing through a crisis in human affairs. This is no small contest. We have arrayed on either side the great forces of society. Against us are those influences which are considered strong and potential— money, the corporations and the high positions in politics and society, but on our side I believe, my friends, is simple justice. We are opposed to the trusts. We want our sons to be permitted to enter life with an even chance without becoming favorites of some great monopoly. We want our children and our children's children to have a right to their place in the race of life without fear

of being crowded out by those great aggregations of wealth which are trampling upon the rights of individuals. We want this nation to be what our forefathers intended it to be. Jefferson was a better Republican than any Republican who stands upon the Republican platform and desires to transfer into the hands of foreign nations the right to legislate over matters of domestic importance. And, my friends, Lincoln was a better Democrat than any Democrat who has left the Democratic party in this campaign to cast in his lot with our opponents. And why? Because upon the fundamental principles Jefferson and Lincoln stood together. They believed in the people; they believed in our form of government, and they believed that this form of government was intended to be perpetuated for the benefit of all the people and not for the benefit of a few alone. We have a great fight on hand now to determine whether the people have a right to govern themselves, and it is not strange that in this fight we see men who voted for Lincoln taking the place of men who have been Democrats until this campaign.

I am not here to tell you upon which side your influence should be cast, but I do appeal to you to recognize the crisis through which we are passing, to recognize the issues at stake, to recognize the tremendous consequences which may follow, and then to throw your influence upon the side that you think is right. I am willing to trust the judgment of the American people; I am willing to trust the conscience of the people because they have always been sufficient in the past and I have no doubt that in this great crisis, whether it is settled now or hereafter, the judgment and the conscience of our people will be sufficient to guide us aright, to make our government better, to make our people happier, and to bring to all the people that joy and prosperity which the gold standard has confined to so small a portion.

I thank you again and again for the honor that you did me in inviting me to address you and for the courtesy which you have shown me.

The third and fourth meetings were out of doors, and the speeches were brief. While in Minneapolis a brief reception was given at the West, and a portion of the time spent at the home of my old college friend Hon. S. B. Howard.

Tuesday morning found us on our way to Duluth by way of Sauk Rapids, Staples, Brainerd and West Superior.

The Duluth meeting was presided over by Congressman Charles A. Towne, who was a candidate for re-election on the fusion ticket in that district.

I found that Mr. Towne had a strong support among his neighbors in the city first made famous by Proctor Knott's speech.

At Duluth, also, there was a ladies' meeting, fully as large as the one at Minneapolis, but owing to our late arrival and early departure, I spoke but a few minutes at this meeting.

Hon. John Lind, whom I had learned to admire when we served together in Congress, was the fusion candidate for Governor, and I was much gratified to note the harmony which existed in Minnesota between the three divisions of the silver forces.

CHAPTER XLIV.

U

THROUGH THE TWO PENINSULAS.

PON our arrival in Duluth we found the Michigan committee in waiting. It consisted of Daniel J. Campau, Esq., chairman of the Executive Committee of the Democratic National Committee; ex-Congressman Justin R. Whiting and wife, Hon. Charles R. Sligh and wife, and ex-Congressman Tim Tarsney. Mr. Whiting, candidate for Lieutenant-Governor in the campaign just closed, was a colleague on the Ways and Means Committee, and his wife was one of Mrs. Bryan's most intimate friends while we were in Washington. Mr. Sligh was the fusion candidate for Governor last fall.

The party left Duluth Tuesday night and spent four days in the State of Michigan. The principal speeches made Wednesday were delivered at Iron Mountain, Ishpeming and Marquette, with shorter stops at a number of smaller places. Going from Marquette to St. Ignace in the night, we crossed the Straits of Mackinac and held an early morning meeting at Mackinaw City. The largest meetings held Thursday were at Traverse City, Big Rapids and Grand Rapids. At the first place mentioned the presiding officer was Hon. James Roberts, a classmate of my father at McKendree College. Three speeches were delivered at Grand Rapids, the first at an outdoor meeting in Campau Square, the second at a meeting attended by women only, and the third, to a mixed audience, the largest of the evening. Below will be found the speech to the ladies:

Grand Rapids Speech-To the Ladies.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies—I had intended to say “and Gentlemen," but I think there are hardly enough gentlemen in the audience to deserve mention. I saw in the evening paper that after a certain hour the gentlemen were to be admitted. I do not know whether that hour has arrived yet or not, but it seems that the gentlemen are not here.

I desire to talk to you just a little while about the silver question, and I desire, if I can, to help you to understand what bimetallism means and what the gold standard means in order that you may decide on which side of the question you ought to stand. In a great contest like this, we must be on one side or the other-there is no middle ground. If the gold standard is right we ought to be for it; if the gold standard is wrong we ought to be against it. But, my friends, you need not hope that everybody will think the same way