We run no risk upon the great question of the finances of this republic. I do not intend in the brief time allotted to me to enter into any elaborate argument upon this question. I assume that this convention desires, as the people of this country desire, that every silver dollar coined shall be the equal of every other dollar coined.

"I find no words in this platform in favor of the maintenance of the parity of the two metals. I find no suggestion of what is to be done in case the experiment fails. I find no suggestion of how you are to brace up this now depreciated currency. Everything is risked upon the mere fact that it shall be given free coin age at the mints., I beg to call your attention to this fact, that in my humble opinion the very policy condemned by this platform is the policy that has kept your greenback currency and your silver dollar at a parity with gold during the past years. We think that times and conditions have changed. We think that you cannot ignore the fact of the great, production of silver in this country. We think you cannot safely ignore the fact, in the preparation of a financial system, that the cost of the production of silver has greatly fallen.

"Why, it is the very pregnant fact that confronts all the world in the solving of this great question, of the immense discovery of silver everywhere. The great fact confronts the world that the cost of silver production has been nearly reduced one-half. If the American people were brave, were courageous, if they had the spirit of 1776, as this platform says, could they, singly and alone, make copper the equal of gold? Could they make lead the equal of gold? Must you not take into consideration the great fact of production, the great fact of the lessening of the cost of production in the last fifteen and twenty years? If bravery, if courage, could produce these results then you could make any metal, no matter what it might be, a money metal. But I tell you, it is a question of economics, a question of business judgment; it is not a question of finance. It is a question of business resources. And upon that it is the judgment of the minority of the committee that the safest course is to take the first great step in favor of international bimetallism and stop there.

"I know it will be said that in some particulars this platform agrees with our republican friends. It, to me, is neither any better nor any worse for it. I call your attention to the fact that your plank upon pensions, that your plank upon the Monroe doctrine, that your plank upon Cuba, that your plank upon territories, that your plank upon Alaska, that your plank even upon civil service are exactly like the republican planks. Therefore I do not think that that criticism will detract from the value of the suggestion.

"Mr. President, I said a few moments ago I thought the safest course for this convention to have pursued was simply to have said that this government should enact a statute in favor of placing gold and silver alike as the currency of the country, and stop there. I do not think, as I said and will repeat it, it is wise to hazard everything upon a single number. Let me go further. I

object to the various provisions of this platform, and I think if the wise, level, cool-headed men, far-sighted men, such as is the distinguished senator from Arkansas who addressed you, had prevailed, that platform would have been different. What was the necessity for opening up the question of greenback circulation? What was the necessity for putting in this platform an implied pledge that this government might issue greenbacks and make them legal tender?

"The democratic party is opposed to paper money. The democratic party from its earliest history has been in favor of hard money. The democratic party thinks that the best way for us to do is to eliminate United States notes and treasury notes from your currency. They are a drag upon your money metals. You have to constantly keep supplied a fund for their redemption, unless you propose to repudiate them. Therefore, when my friend from South Carolina and my friend from Arkansas say that this platform says what it means and means what it says, I would like to have some one who follows me tell what this platform means upon the subject of the issue of paper money hereafter. I am not violating, I think, the secrets of the committee-room when I say that it was avowed that this government might desire to pursue that course, and this is an attempt at this late day to commit the democratic party to the suicidal policy of the issuing of paper money. You say you wanted a clear and distinct platform. You have not got it upon that question. It cannot be defended successfully.

'Another suggestion permit me to make. What was the necessity for putting into the platform other questions which have never been made the tests of democratic loyalty before? Why we find the disputed question of the policy and constitutionality of an income tax. What! Has it come to this, that the, followers of Samuel J. Tilden, who, during all his life was the opponent of that iniquitous scheme, which was used against him in his old age to annoy and harass him and humiliate him-why, I say, should it be left to this convention to make as a tenet of democratic faith belief in the propriety and constitutionality of an income law? Why was it wise to assail the supreme court of your country? Will some one tell me what that clause means in this platform? If you meant what you said and said what you meant, will some one explain that provision? That provision, if it means anything, means that it is the duty of congress to reconstruct the supreme court of the country. It means, and it was openly avowed, it means the adding of additional members to it, or the turning out of office and reconstructing the whole court. I said I will not follow any such revolutionary step as that. Whenever before in the history of this country has devotion to an income tax been made the test of democratic loyalty? Never. Have you not undertaken enough, my good friends, now, without seeking to put in this platform these unnecessary, foolish and ridiculous things?

"What further have you done? In this platform you have de.clared for the first time in the history of this country, that you are

opposed to any life tenure whatever for office. Our fathers before us, our democratic fathers, whom we revere, in the establishment of this government, gave our court judges a life tenure of office. What necessity was there for reviving this question? How foolish and how unnecessary, in my opinion. Our democrats, whose whole lives have been devoted to the service of the party, men whose hopes, whose ambitions, whose aspirations, all lie within party lines, are to be driven out of the party upon this new question of life tenure for the court judges of our federal court. This is a revolutionary step, this is an unwise step, this is an unprecedented step in our party history."

"Another question that I think should have been avoided, and that is this: What was the necessity, what the propriety of taking up the vexed question of the issue of bonds for the preservation of the credit of the nation? Why not have left this financial question of the free coinage of silver alone? What have you declared? You have announced the policy that under no circumstances shall there ever be a single bond issued in times of peace. You have not excepted anything. What does this mean? It means the virtual repeal of your resumption act; it means repudiation per se and simple.

The statement is too broad, the statement is too sweeping; it has not been carefully considered. You even oppose congress doing it; you even oppose the president doing it; vou oppose them doing it either singly or unitedly; you stand upon the broad proposition that for no purpose, whether to protect the currency or notwhether to preserve your national credit or for any other purposeshall there be a bond issued. Why, how surprising that would be to my democratic associates in the senate who for the last two or three years have introduced bill after bill for the issuing of bonds for the Nicaragua Canal and other purposes.

"No, no, my friends, this platform has not been wisely considered. In your zeal for monetary reform you have gone out of the true path; you have turned from the true course, and in your anxiety to build up the silver currency you have unnecessarily put in this platform provisions which cannot stand a fair discussion. Let me tell you, my friends, without going into a discussion of the bond question proper, which is somewhat foreign to this subject-let me tell you what would be the condition of this country today if the President of the United States, in the discharge of the public duty that is conferred upon him, had not seen fit to issue bonds to protect the credit of the government. The democratic party has passed a tariff bill which, unfortunately, has not produced a sufficient revenue to meet the necessities of the government. There has been a deficit of about fifty millions a year. It is hoped that in the near future this bill will produce ample revenues for the support of the government, but in the meantime your greenback currency and your treasury notes must be redeemed when they are presented, if you would preserve the honor and the credit of the nation. Where would the money have come from if your President and your southern secretary of the treasury had not

discharged their duty by the issuing of bonds to save the credit of the country?

"Let me call your attention to the figures. There has been issued during this administration $262,000,000 of bonds. What amount of money have you in the treasury today? Only just about that sum. Where would you have obtained the means with which to redeem your paper money if it had not been pro duced by the sale of bonds? Why, my friend Tillman could not have had money enough out of the treasury from his salary to pay his expenses home.

"Mr. President, I reiterate to this convention that this has brought into this canvass an unnecessary, a foolish issue, which puts us on the defense in every school district in the state.

"I do not propose to detain you by any other criticism of this platform at this time. It is sufficient that you have entered upon an issue on which the democracy is largely divided. In addition to that you have unwisely brought into this platform other quesions foreign to the main question, and made the support of them the test of democracy. I do not think that this was the course that should have been pursued. Mr. President, there is time enough yet to retrace these false steps. The burdens you have imposed upon us in the eastern states in the support of this platform in its question relating to silver is all that can be reasonably borne. But in addition to that you have put upon us the question of the preservation of the public credit. You have brought into it the question of the issuing of bonds. You have brought into it the question of the reconstruction of the supreme court. You have brought into it the question of the issuing of paper money. You have brought into it the great question of life tenure in office. And this platform is full of incongruous and absurd provisions which are proposed to be made the test of true democracy.

"Mr. President, it is not for me to revive any question of sec tionalism, and I shall not do it. This country is now at peace, all sections of it, and let it so remain. I care not from what section of the country the democrat comes, so long as he is true to the fun damental principles of our fathers. I will take him by the hand and express my friendly sentiments toward him. The question of sectionalism will creep in in spite of the efforts of our best men to keep it out. I oppose this platform because I think it makes our success more difficult. I want the grand old party with which I have been associated from my boyhood to be-I have looked forward to the day when it should be securely intrenched in the affections of the American people. I dislike the republican party. I dislike all their tenets. I have no sympathy with their general principles; but I do think that we are here today making a mistake in the venture which we are about to take. Be not deceived. Do not attempt to drive old democrats out of the party that have grown gray in its service, to make room for a lot of republicans and old whigs and other populists that will not vote your ticket after all.