Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1896-07-17

not a spot of ground upon which the
enemy will dare to challenge battle.
Why, if they tell us that the gold stand
ard is Il good thing, we point to their
platform and tell them that their plat
form pledges the party to get rid Of
gold standard and substitute bimetal-
lism.
If the gold standard is a good thing,
why try to get rid of it? might call at
tention to the tact that some of the peo-
pie who are ". this convention today and
who tell you that we ought to declare
in favor of international bimetallism
and thereby declare that gold standard
is wrong and that the principle of BIZ
metallism is better-these very people
four months ago were open and avowed
advocates of the gold standard and tell
ing us that we could not legislate two
metals together even with all the world.
want to suggest this truth-that 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 bad thing, why
should we wait until some other nations
are willing to help us let go? Here is
the line of battle, We care not upon
which issue they force the fight. We
are prepared to meet them on either is
sue or ON both. If they tell us that the
gold standard is the standard of civil
cation, we reply to them that this, the
the earth, has never declared for a gold
standard and both the parties this year
standard is the standard of civilization,
why, my friends should we not have
it? So, if they come to meet us on that,
we can present the history of our nation.
More than that, we can tell them
this-that they will search the pages of
history in vain to find a single instance
i'll which the common people of any land
have ever declared themselves i'll favor
'of u gold standard. They can find where
the holders Of fixed investments have.
Mr. Carlisle said in 1878 that this was
struggle between the idle holders of
idle capital aud the struggling masses
who produce the wealth and pay the
taxes Of the country; and, my friends,
it is simply question thatAve shall de-
eide upon which side shall the Demo
cratic party fight-upOn the side of the
idle holders % idle capital or upon the
side Of the struggling masses? That is
the question that the party must answer
first, and then it must be answered by
each individual hereafter.
The sympa HES of the Democratic
party, as described 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 just legislate
to make the well to do prosperous
their prosperity will leak through ON
those below. The Democratic idea has
been that if you legislate to make the
masses prosperous their prosperity will
find its way up and through every class
and rest upon it.
You come to US and tell us that the
great cities are III favor of the gold
standard. 1 tell You that the great cities
rest upon these broad and fertile prai-
ries. 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 this country.
My friends, we shall declare that this
nation is able to lcgislatc for its own
people On every question without wait
ing for the aid or consent of any other
nation on earth Upon that issue we
expect to carry every single state in this
Union.
shall not Islander the fair state of
Massachusetts nor the state of New
York by saying that when its citizens
are confronted with the proposition, Is
this nation able to attend to its own
business?-I will not Islander either one
by saying thar the people of those states
will declare our helpless impotency as
nation to attend to our own business.
1t is the issue of 1776 over again.
Our ancestors, when but 8, 900, 900, had
the courage to declare their political in
] lo,nn,dnrnn Of n,rnr,r oAhn,. ,,ntin,, ,,,,n,,