The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1896-08-31
NOT WORTH TALKING OF.
Bryan Says Tariff Question Is
Insignificant.
THE THIRD PARTY MOVEMENT
ROUNDLY DENOUNCED.

Rings In Old Chestnut About Republicans
ard-More Populistic References To
/ Wall Street.
Hornellsville, N. Y, August 29.-Be-
fore large gathering at Maple City
park near Hornellsyille this afternoon,
VIM. j. Bryan severely criticized the
third ticket movement and those taking
part in it. The cheers that greeted the
candidate when he WIS presented by
Alderman Dolzon were of the hear test
and continued for some time. Mr. Bry-
ans voice was husky when he began, but
coon gained strength and came out
strong and clear before the speech was
finished. Mr.. Bryan began by reading
from Buffalo paper an interview with
an Indian merchant, whose name was
not given, saying that Hindoo and Par
see bankers and potentates were awaiting
free silver legislation in America in the
hope Of unloading their vast stores Of sill
Yer.
"There. " said Mr.. Bryan, lis cor
respondent who does not sign his name.
telling about man of high commercial
standing, whose name he does not give,
who quotes what q leading merchant
says, whose name is unknown, and who
says there is we'll founded rumor that
certain things that are going to happen.
That, my friends, is the sort Of argu-
ments being spread before the Am erican
people. Why do not these men who are
giving opinions give their names SO we
can find out whQ the men are and what
the opinion is worth. Let me give you
another evidence of lack of candor and
directness that characterizes our oppo-
nents.
EX-SECRETARY FAIRCHILD
i do not see how we can do anything
else than put third ticket in the prssi-
Dental arena. We have practically COM
mitted ourselves to such a course. We
want to see the defeat of the Chicago
ticket and we shall try to draw away as
many voters as we can from it. We feel
this defeat may best be accomplished by
q third ticket. OF course we shall find
no fault with those of our friends who
cast straight vote for Mckinley. AS
to who the nominee will be l have not
the slightest idea. Now there, my
friends" said MIR Bryan, lis party
that claims to be in favor of honest
money advocating the putting up of II
| ticket, not for the purpose of electing
the ticket, not for the purpose of voting
for the ticket but for the purpose of cleo
ting another man whom they are not
willing to endorse in convention.
simply call your attention to the methods
We have to meet in this campaign, and
| ask you whether these methods oharaot-
erize political party that is so devoted
to honesty IN everything that it wants
honest money and sound dollars now, as
| against a party that not daring TO adj
vocate gold standard yet declares in
favor of its maintenance until some
other nations come to our relief, and as
against another so-oalled party that ad-
| vOoates the nomination of @ ticket, not
for the purpose of electing it, but for the
purpose of electing another ticket?
'sWe present straight forward, en-
phatio declaration SO clear that one who
runs may rend. We demand the imme-
date restoration of the free and unlim-
tied coinage of gold and silver at the
present ratio of 16 to /. without waiting
for the aid or consent of any other nation
on earth. l believe you have right to
consider the frankness, the candor with
which these positions are stated when
you come to decide which side is honestly
| striving to do that which, is best for the
American people. Our opponents have
| no policy on the money question. They
do not say gold standard was good, and
yet, my frionds, parties have existed
here, parties have written platforms,
parties have nominated candidates, par
ties have carried on campaigns and no
party from the beginning of our history
until today has ever said in a national
platform chat gold standard is good
thing for the American people.
NO PARTY WOULD DARE
to say that and then go forth before a
people which for 90 years has suffered
under the burdens of a gold standard.
but what do our opponents sayp They
say: we pledge ourselves to get rid of
the gold standard and to substitute the
principle of bimetallism. Does not the
mean that bimetallism is better than a
gold standard?
There can be no other construction
placed upon it, and yet after having
declared that bimetallism Is better than
gold standard that same platform says
until the leading commercial nations
consent to international bimetallism we
will try and bear the gold standard. Now
1t the gold standard is q good thing the
Republican party ought to have de-
clared in favor of its perpetual main
teuance. IL the gold standard is good
thing then the United States ought to
have it, and If the gold standard is a
bad thing. then no foreign nation should
be permitted to force q gold standard
upon the people of the United States.''
l.