gold standard and substitute bimetallism. If the gold standard is a good thing, why try to get rid of it? I call your attention to the fact that some of the very people who are in this convention today, and who tell us that we ought to declare in favor of international bimetallism-thereby declaring that the gold standard is wrong and that the principle of bimetallism is better-these very people, four months ago, were open and avowed advocates of the gold standard, and were then telling us that we could not legislate two metals together, even with the aid of all the world. If the gold standard is a good thing, we ought to declare in favor of its retention, and not in favor of abandoning it; and if the gold standard is a bad thing, why should we wait until other nations are willing to help us to let go? Here is the line of battle, and we care not upon which issue they force the fight; we are prepared to meet them on either issue or on both. If they tell us that the gold standard is the standard of civilization, we reply to them that this, the most enlightened of all the nations of the earth, has never declared for a gold standard, and that both the great parties this year are declaring against it. If the gold standard is the standard of civilization, why, my friends, should we not have it? If they come to meet us on that issue, we can present the history of our nation. More than that; we can tell them that they will search the pages of history in vain

329

to find a single instance where the common people of any land have ever declared themselves in favor of the gold standard. They can find where the holders of fixed investments have declared for a gold standard, but not where the masses have.

"Mr. Carlisle said, in 1878, that this was a struggle between 'the idle holders of idle capital' and the struggling masses, who produce the wealth and pay the taxes of the country,' and, my friends, the question we are to decide is: Upon which side will the Democratic party fight: upon the side of the 'idle holders of idle capital,' or upon the side of the struggling masses?' That is the question which the party must answer first, and then it must be answered by each individual hereafter. The sympathies of the Democratic party, as shown by the platform, are on the side of the struggling masses who have ever been the foundation of the Democratic party. There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that, if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests upon them.

"You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard; we reply

that the great cities rest upon our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.

"My friends, we declare that this nation is able to legislate for its own people on every question, without waiting for the aid or consent of any other nation on earth; and upon that issue we expect to carry every State in the Union. I shall not slander the inhabitants of the fair State of Massachusetts nor the inhabitants of the State of New York by saying that, when they are confronted with the proposition, they will declare that this nation is not able to attend to its own business. It is the issue of 1776 over again. Our ancestors, when but three millions in number, had the courage to declare their political independence of every other nation; shall we, their descendants, when we have grown to seventy millions, declare that we are less independent than our forefathers? No, my friends, that will never be the verdict of our people. Therefore, we care not upon what lines the battle is fought. If they say bimetallism is good, but that we cannot have it until other nations help us, we reply that, instead of having a gold standard because England has, we will restore bimetallism and then let England have bimetallism because the United States has it. If

they dare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard as a good thing, we will fight them to the uttermost. Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: 'You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.'"

CHAPTER XX.

CONVENTION-CONTINUED.

At the conclusion of this speech there was a demonstration, the like of which had never been seen in a convention, and which is also best described by again calling upon the Chicago TimesHerald, that paper reporting the scene in this language:

Nebraska was the central star around which all other silver delegations clustered, in the midst of the popular demonstration to the orator from the Platte Country. Chairman Smyth, of the Nebraska delegation, grasped the hand of Bryan when he returned from the stage, pale with victory and excitement. In another instant Smyth was on his chair waving the blue Nebraska standard with an energy born of ecstasy. The members of the Nebraska delegation pulled red bandannas from their pockets and waved them enthusiastically. The sight of the emblem of 'the old Roman' used in former campaigns, awakened the Ohio delegation across the aisle.

"Bush, of Georgia, bewhiskered and strong of lung, ran down the aisle with the Georgia standard toward the Nebraska chairs. A wild yell from the rear of the hall disclosed Joe Lacy, the