Mexico weekly ledger., 1896-08-06
COL. BUCKNER TO COL, COOK.
The Lawyer Tries to Answer the
Editor-H His Relations With Gov
ernor Stone. Touched Upon.

which recently appeared in tn
Kansas City Star. 1 shall not en-
, gage III any controversy with you
or others, about my position In thi
campaign, but, inasmuch as vol
have written and published you,
editorial at my old home, wher,
live those whose good will | esteem
and whose favor and kindness
shall never forget, l desire to sub
NIT this reply to your criticism il
explanation of my course.
You charge me with being in
consistent.
In the same editorial, and il
others which have appeared in you
paper, you attempt to convey thu
impression that the Democratic
party has always been in favor o
the free, Independent and unlimited
coinage of silver at the ratio of II
to l, and has always been opposed
to the arbitrary S of Fedora,
troops i'll state affairs, and argue
as | have always been a consistent
Democrat, that therefore | am now
inconsistent in not giving the Dem
ocratic platform and its candidates
my support. ] care nothing fol
your argument along that line
Some people would rather be con.
sistently wrong than right. IwOuld
rather be right than consistent. In
other words, if l ear only be consist.
ent at the sacrifice of violating my
conscience, my manhood and my
patriotism, then l prefer to be incon.
sistent.
The argument of inconsistency is
a poor one, indeed, with which to
appeal to the sense and intelligence
of a patriotic PEOPLE. The question
is, am right in opposing the plat.
form adopted at Chicago? Is the
platform itself a declaration of prin-
ciples which are right and which
should find expression in the organic
law of this country by Legislative
enactment
Replying to your charge of incon-
sistency, first, deny that | am
either inconsistent or wrong. |
affirm that the platform of 1896 con-
tains statements, which, taken in
connection with the facts and cir
cumstances attending its adoption,
were never embraced in a Demo
cratic creed in any year prior to this.
say now, and have always said, it
was Numerically opposed to the
platform of 1892. 1t declares for
free, unlimited and Independent
coinage of silver at the ratio of 16
to 1, when such a doctrine was re-
pudiated in 1892 by the decisive vote
of 913 to II in the Democratic con-
yention at Chicago. The doctrine
was SO overwhelmingly repudiated
that the men who proposed the free
coinage plank bolted the convention
and went into the Populist camp,
where they belonged. supported
the platform and candidate of 1892
on the stump and with my vote. l
made no less than twenty speeches
in this state for that platform and
| that excellent ticket which led us
to victory; yet, in not a single
speech, did l ever advocate the re-
pudiated doctrine found in the free
and independent coinage resolution
at the ratio of 16 to 1, and no one
GpnuDs fbiS haitian than tho aHifor Of
THE INTELLIGENCER. 1 stood upon
the Chicago platform of 1892. 1t
declared in favor of the repeal of
the Sherman law. The convention,
by the vote above given, declined to
declare in favor of the free, unlim-
tied and Independent coinage of sill
yer at the ratio of 16 to 1. Having
refused to declare in favor of it was
declaring against it, and any intel
ligent person must read history
that way.
No national Democratic conven-
ton, prior to the gathering at Chi
cago, miscalled Democratic, ever
advocated the free, unlimited and
independent coinage or primary or
redemption money upon any other
basis except a ratio, based upon the
commodity, or commercial value of
the bullion out of which the money
was coined. No national Demo
cratic convention ever advocated
any different doctrine, and 1 defy
you, as the champion of this prin-
ciple, to name any national Demo-
cratic platform which ever advo-
Gated such a heresy as is contained
in the platform of 1896. If you can
find such a declaration, l will plead
guilty to your charge of ~inconsist-
ency (but l will still be right, that
the principle is wrong.) If you can
not find a case where the national
Democratic party has advocated
fiatism prior to this, then | main
tain to show the convention at
Chicago has departed from Demo
cratic principles. Youcan not claim
that the Democratic party has been
right during its long and illustrious
history and your platform is right
now, because the history of the
Democratic party has always been
opposed to the principle embraced
in the platform of 1896. If your
n 'atiorm is right now the party was
~pg in 1892, when it declared
,oain, It It, and has been wrong dur
NO its I, 'ugaud honored history. If
t was rio ut then, you and your
party are WI, ing aow. The PROPOSE
ion embodied in our platform ask
ng for the free, unlimited and indie
pendent coinage IF silver at the
of 10 to 1, is no only opposed
all prior ~utterances If the party
the question, but is opposed 10
I'll fundamental Democrat. Sprincl,
'les, is not right, and is Vosteu
neither reason or authority. ~
. impossible. The governm,'nf
an make token money out of any,
hing and 30 long as it is able to i,
'edeem it, then it is good money. {
{ can not, however, any more
make sixteen ounces of silver worth
ounce of gold when the market
10 tbirfy- fxx,o fa ono than IL /