People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1892-10-07

. SA0 00A 0AO NOFC csoU. Laugh
ter. I have no time, however, to
dwell on that.
| want to be perfectly fair in my
rejoinder. He says that Northen, at
Thomson, did not take a position on
the national platform, but took 1t on
the platform which the Executive
Committee made up here in Atlanta.
[ was there when that speech was
delivered. Here is the Augusta
Chronicle report. Reads.
The editor of the Alliance Farmer
asked him where he stood on the finance
question. He answered Il stand
squarely on the platform of the National
Alliance"
Not on a little State platform.
Not what the Executive Committee
did /; but fat-footed on the platform
Of the National Alliance. (Great
applause.) Fellow citizens, I put it
to you as farmers whether or not
every man who stood in the Alliance
was not bound by what the National
Convention did, and not by what the
Executive Committee did.
Voices. Yes, yes, yes. Hurrah for
Watson.
Mr.. Watson. have already shown
you that Mr.. Livington himself in
PRODUCED a resolution indorsing, not
the Ocala platform, not the platform
made in Atlanta. but emnhaticalIv
indorsing the St. Louis platform last
December. Now, as Livingston IN
troduced that resolution, you see
that the Livingston Of to-day is CON
demned by the Livingston OF last
December. (Great applause.) He
says that there was no vote taken by
States. I only know what the official
minutes show, of the National Ali
ance, and the official minutes show
that the vote was taken by States,
and that Georgia voted, yes. (Re-
Moved and long continued applause.)
Mr.. Loucks, now President Of the
National Alliance, and who is pres
ent, says there was q unanimous vote
on every subject except the sub
treasury. Now come around and
look, boys, at the Livingston Of then
and to-day-not what Livingston
says, not what the newspaper say
but what the official minutes of the
National Alliance say.
Voices. Glory, glory hallelujah !
Hit him again for me, and: That's
cruel.
Mr. Watson. The next meeting
was held at Indianapolis. The State
of Georgia was represented there.
The Indianapolis Convention went as
far as the St. Louis Convention along
that line, instructing US to vote for
no man for Speaker who did not stand
upon both platforms. Livingston
was in that Convention. The great
State Of Georgia was in that Conven.
tion. Now I ask you, was not Geor-
gia as much bound by that vote as by
the vote at Ocala?
Not only chat, the Cincinnati meet
ing had been held in May, 1890,
which formulated the third party.
Weaver was one Of the leaders in it.
Weaver was in that meeting down
here, and Livingston paid his ex-
penses. daughter and applause.)
/ know that he plays the baby act,
and says that he didn't know Of his
record. My God! amt he too old
to play the baby act? (Renewed
and long continued laughter.)
@. G. Post is denounced. Bitterly
denounced with all the old party
hatred and soorn and contempt every
where, and YET, when G. G. Post
went to the North and West to build
up the Peoples party he had the in
dorsement Of L. +. Livingston in his
pocket. daughter and applause.)
Not only that, when the Hon. L. F.
Livingston came back from the St.
Louis Convention, where he was as
much bound by the action Of that
Convention as any minority ought
ever to be bound, he said at Coving-
ton, what? That the reason he had
entered that caucus and voted for
Crisp, was, that there was a conspir-
acy between the money kings about
the financial plank to put the tariff
forward and put the financial ques-.
ton back.
THE nicely dressed derby and
plug hated, boys from Atlanta and
Augusta at this point began to show
their fangs. Owing to admonitlons
which they received early in the
meeting, they did not indulge in open
demonsu atoms, but kept up general
conversation among themselves. Some
Of the people began expostulating
with them, aud the speaker continued
after long pause.
Mr.. Watson. They do not want
to hear; they do not want you to
hear.
He went all over this country de-
nouncing the national banking sys-
TEN. Did he tell you then that you
could not repeal it? Did not he tell
you then that you could repeal it /?
Here is the record. Ideny his state
ment, and have the proofs here.
Here is the original Act of 1864, and
the last section says: (Reads.)
"Bo it further enacted, That Congress