the war. The national bank notes are payable in lawful money, and a bank at any time during the war could redeem its notes either in gold, silver or greenbacks. Which did the banks use? Did they use any gold? Oh, no, for gold was at a premium then. Did they use any silver? No, for silver was at a higher premium than gold. What did they use? They used the cheapest money they could get. The greenbacks were the money used to redeem the bank notes. The greenback has always been as good as the bank note, because the greenback always stood behind the bank note; and if the greenback is good enough to stand behind a bank note, it is good enough to stand in the open without any bank note in front of it. But suppose we wipe out the greenbacks and Treasury notes, then what? I venture the assertion that the very people who today say that the Government cannot keep every dollar as good as every other dollar except by redeeming all the greenbacks and Treasury notes in gold, if gold is demanded-those very people, if greenbacks and Treasury notes are taken out of the way, will insist that the Government cannot keep every dollar as good as every other dollar unless it stands ready to redeem every silver dollar and every silver certificate in gold, if gold is demanded; and if they do that then they start another endless chain. My friends, the fault is not with the greenback or with the Treasury note; the fault is in the construction placed upon the law and in the policy of those who are in charge of the administration of the Government, and who are surrendering the choice of the coin to be used in payment. We must either have two kinds of money which are equally a legal tender and can be used by the Government at its option, or we must have only one. If we are going to have two kinds of legal tender money which the people can use to pay the debts which they owe to the Government, that money must be used by the Government in paying the debts which it owes to the people.

I have pointed out the plan by which we propose to relieve the Government of its difficulties. Let me leave you with one other thought for your consideration. The Republican party in its platform expressly states that the financial policy of this nation must be determined by foreign nations rather than by ours. The platform says that the Republican party pledges itself to secure international bimetallism as soon as possible, but that, until that can be secured, we must maintain the gold standard. What does that mean? It means that bimetallism is better than a gold standard, but that we cannot have that better thing until the leading commercial nations of Europe shall consent to its adoption. Dces it say that we must bear the affliction of a gold standard for a year? No, it does not limit to a year. For four years? No, it does not limit it to four years. How long? According to the Republican platform we must bear the affliction of a gold standard forever, if foreign nations insist upon it.

I want to call your attention to what some one has said about the influence of foreign nations and foreign personages in the affairs of our nation. Be silent while I read these words:

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens), the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

There is the language which I desire to press upon your memories. It is not my language. Whose language do you suppose that it? What man,

"trying to stir up the passions of our people against foreigners;" what demagogue "appealing to the mob to justify his course;" what anarchist do you suppose used those words? Those are the words of George Washington. If George Washington could warn his countrymen against the evil effects of foreign influence, if George Washington could say to his countrymen that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes to republican government, may I not repeat what he said almost one hundred years after the date of its first utterance? If it was true then, it is true now. My friends, I warn you against entrusting the destinies of this nation to legislative bodies which are beyond your control. How can you reach your own Government? How can you change your own laws? You can do it at the ballot box. If the law is bad you can repeal it. If you want a good law enacted you can write it upon the statute books when the majority concur. But suppose you turn over to other nations the power to determine when you shall have bimetallism. How can you get them to act? Can you vote men into office in foreign nations? No, it is not within your power, either to elect or discard. How can you get at them? Send them a petition; that is the way to do it. If the Republican party is going to carry out this policy it ought to have at every public meeting a blank petition, to be signed by the people present, asking foreign nations to please give us bimetallism. What is your chance by petition? Why, my friends, for twenty years and more the people of this nation, the producers of wealth, the toiling masses have petitioned all parties to give them bimetallism, and when the Republican party met in St. Louis the wail of distress arising from our people was loud enough to have been heard by anybody whose ears were not entirely occupied with the sounds that come from Wall street. Did they hear your petitions? No, they disregarded them. I ask you, Republicans, if the Republican party, which you helped to make, was deaf to your entreaties, what hope have you of making an impression upon foreign legislative bodies? I ask you, Republicans, who have been the bone and sinew of the Republican party since the time it elected Lincoln, if the Republican party does not have mercy when you cry, how can you expect to find pity in a nation from which your forfathers wrested the empire in which we live? There are people who honestly believe that this nation is not strong enough to contend against the money centers of the world. Well, if a man believes it, we cannot criticise him for expressing his belief at the ballot box, but I want to ask you, who, of the people who are opposed to the free coinage of silver, would be willing to print upon a card, "I do not think my nation is big enough to take care of itself," and put it in his hat and wear it from now until election day? And yet that is what every man says who says that we ought to get rid of the gold standard and have bimetallism, but that we cannot do it until some other nations help us.

I am not here to ask

I want to leave to you this parting word: for your votes. I have too much respect for the sovereignty of the citizen to appeal to him to present to me his vote as a gift. It is his own, not to part with by begging or by selling. It is his own, not to surrender under threat or coercion; it is his own to do with what he pleases. But when I surrender all claim to the votes of those who believe that the restora

tion of the free coinage of silver by this nation alone would be injurious, I assert my claims to the votes of those who believe in the immediate restoration of the free and unlimited coinage of gold and silver at the present legal ratio of 16 to 1, without waiting for the aid or consent of any other nation.

Later I addressed a large overflow meeting held near by. Sunday was spent at the hospitable home of Mr. Wall, and it is remembered as one of the most restful Sabbaths of the campaign. Bishop Samuel Fallows. of Chicago, was in Milwaukee on that day and I had the pleasure of listening to him at the morning service. The trip to Chicago Monday morning was made without special incident.

CHAPTER XXV.

L

LABOR DAY.

ABOR day deserves a chapter by itself. An invitation to speak in Chicago on Labor day was extended to me soon after the National Convention by the Building Trades Council of that city, but it was not until a short time before the day arrived that I found it possible to give a definite reply. The forenoon was devoted to a parade, which was said to be one of the most imposing ever held on such an occasion. During the forenoon a committee of horseshoers called and on behalf of their order presented a silver horseshoe, which now occupies a place in my cabinet. I might add here that during the campaign some twenty horseshoes were received from various sources, some solid silver, some silver-plated, some of polished steel and some old and rusty, just as they were picked up in the road. The horseshoe is said to bring good luck to its possessor; I leave each reader to determine for himself whether the horseshoe has lost its charm, whether too many horseshoes suspend the operation of the rule, or whether, after all, the result was fortunate for me. In the afternoon a committee consisting of Messrs. Edward Carroll, president of the Building Trades Council, John J. Ryan, chairman of the committee of speakers, and J. D. McKinley, chairman of the Carpenters' District Committee, called and accompanied me to Sharpshooters' Park. Here a large and enthusiastic crowd was assembled. My speech on this occasion is given below:

Labor Day Speech.

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I desire to thank the Building Trades Council for the opportunity to speak to the people assembled today. Labor day has become a fixed event among our holidays, and it is well that it is so, because on this day, all over the nation, those who are engaged in the production of wealth meet with each other to discuss the questions in which working men are especially interested, and to emphasize before the world that there is nothing dishonorable in the fact that one earns his bread in the sweat of his face. I am glad to stand in the presence of those to whom this nation is so largely indebted for all that it has been, for all that it is now, and for all that it can hope to be.

I am not indulging in idle flattery when I say to you that no other people

are so important to the welfare of society as those whose brain and muscle convert the natural resources of the world into material wealth.

I call your attention to the language of Hon. John G. Carlisle, in 1878, when he described these people as "the struggling masses who produce the wealth and pay the taxes of the country." He did not praise them too highly, "The struggling masses" not only produce the wealth and pay the taxes of the country in time of peace, but "the struggling masses" have ever been, and must ever be, the nation's surest protection in time of peril.

Abraham Lincoln expressed himself strongly upon this subject. message to Congress, in 1861, he said:

In a

Monarchy itself is sometimes hinted at as a possible refuge from the power of the people. In my present position I could scarcely be justified were I to omit raising a warning voice against this approach of returning despotism. It is not needed or fitting here that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions, but there is one point with its connection not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effort to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor in the structure of government; it is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital, that nobody labors unless somebody else owning capital somehow, by the use of it, induces him to labor.

And then he adds:

Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor. and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much the higher consideration.

And mark these words of his:

No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those who toil up from poverty; none less inclined to take or touch aught which they have not honestly earned. Let them beware of surrendering a political power which they already possess and which, if surrendered, will surely be used to close the doors of advancement against such as they, and to fix new disabilities and burdens upon them till all of liberty shall be lost.

These are the words of Lincoln. They were not intended to arouse animosity against capital, but they state a great truth that ought always to be remembered that capital is but the fruit of labor, and that labor cannot be destroyed without destroying the possibility of future capital.

I have quoted from two of our public men. Let me now read to you the language used by one whose words have won for him the title of the wisest of men-Solomon. He said:

Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me, lest I be full, and deny Thee and say, who is the Lord? Or lest I be poor, and steal and take the name of my God in vain.

Solomon desired neither poverty nor riches. He rightly estimated the dangers which lie at either extreme and preferred the--I was about to say, golden, but will call it the-golden and silver mean. Neither great wealth nor abject poverty furnishes the soil in which the best civilization grows. Those who are hard pressed by poverty lose the ambition, the inspiration and the high purpose which lead men to the greatest achievements; while those who possess too great riches lack the necessity for that labor which is absolutely essential to the development of all that is useful. Solomon was right, therefore, when he praised the intermediate condition, for the great middle classes are the bul wark of society, and from them has come almost all the good that has blessed the human race.