The San Francisco call., 1896-08-26
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.
CANDIDATE sEwALL.
SHALL He PREVENT UNION OF THE REFoRs
FORCES

SHALL He PREVENT UNION OF THE REFORM
FORCES
To the Editor of the San Francisco CdtE-SIR:
The platform on which Bryan stands not only
demands the free coinage of silver, but as ex-
plicitly demands the abolition of the National
banks as banks of issue and the issuance by
the Government only of all money, paper
money as we'll as gold and silver money.
These are the words of that platform: Soon
gress alone has the power to coin or issue
money" and these words follow: "That
power cannot be delegated to corporations or
individuals" That is pure and absolute
Populism. Bourke Cochran, gold Democrat,
and John Sherman, gold Republican, and all
the Mckinley news papers OF the whole
country denounce Bryan as Populist He
does not deny il. Then. too, he is as much the
candidate of the Popuiists as he Is OF the new
Democracy. The old Democracy, the Cleve-
land Democracy, repudiate him and his plat
form and they have called National conyen-
ton to nominate a gold candidate. 1t is un-
derstood that they will nominate Mckinley.
In this grave emergency, this National crisis,
when the line of battle is drawn between gold
men, National bankers and the corporate
monopolies on the one side and on the other
side the common people and the lndustr1al
interests demand a National money issued by
the Government only, the free coinage OF
silver and the ownership by the Government
of the great corporate monopolies, instead OF
having the Government owned aud operated
land, as it was under Harrison, as it viii be
under Hanna-in this grave crisis, say, the
straight Populists OF the country are con-
fronted with Arthur Sewall, a national banker
and q rank corporationist, who is the candl-
date for the Vice-Presidency on the Democratic
ticket and who, by reason OF our laws, Is In a
position to force division OF the vote for
Bryan if straight Populiss refuse to vote Tor
him tSewall). The question which comes
home to me, as it must to every other straight
Populist from Maine to California, and the
.nr- hn dnH
must be answered, is this: Shall Arthur Sewall
prevent q union of the reform forces and
thereby certainly defeat Bryan and all he
stands for--the demand for National money,
for the free coinage of silver, the overthrow of
the gold men, the National banks, and the
Government ownership of the great monop-
Mckinley, the rule of gold and national banks
and the oppression OF the CORPORATIONS for four
years more, ii not for another generation?
That is the question which straight Popu-
lists must decide If Arthur Sewall finally
fails to prove himself a genuine patriot by re-
fusing to force his candidacy upon resentful
Populists, instead of retiring from the ticket
and removing the one cause for friction and
Just resentment between the reform forces.
insist that as straight Populists we cannot
ignore this question. 1t is impossible to escape
we cannot vote for Bryan and Watson
alone, as the law stands, without casting
more than half of our votes for McKin-
ley and Hobart. As the election may be close,
any one Of common sense can see that the nine
electoral votes of California, lost to Bryan,
would be almost certain TO give Mckinley
the Electoral College, where 227 votes will de-
eide who shall be President, will be very
likely to turn the scale against Bryan and for
Mckinley If straight Populists cast only four
votes for Bryan, instead of nine, by refusing
to vote for the justly obnoxious Sswall also.
If we did not have to vote for Presidential
electors; If the Populist doctrine that we
should vote directly for the Presidential Cam
didates by name were the law, then we could
cast all our votes for Bryan and Watson by
name, and all of our votes would be effective;
but cannot do so now, for the law prevents it.
As there seems to be much confusion and
misa pprehension in the public mind as to the
fact that a straight Populist vote for Bryan
and Watson alone is less than half q vote for
Bryan in effect, and more than half vote for
Mckinley, it is worth while to try to make the
fact plain and clear to all straight Populists.
well as to straight Democrats who prefer to
vote for sewall alone, because ne is the regular
Democratic candidate and is not q Populist.
No one of ordinary sense will seriously claim
that ii the Democrats should put up nine
straight Bryan and Sewall electors there would
be any chance whatever of electing them. 1t
is no doubt true that line straight Bryan and
Watson electors would poll much larger vote
than the Sewali electors, but only sanguine
PopulistS could hope to elect them.
Again: Ii Democrats vote for Bryan and Sew
all electors alone these five electors certain
to be defeated, since no Populist would vote for
them. The same result will follow If Populists
vote for Bryan and Watson alone, since they
could not expect enough Democrats to vote for
them to insure their election.
On the other hand, there is no possibility of
defeating the combined vote of both Demo-
Gratis and Populists, each voting for the cam
didates of the other in self-defense and to se-
cure the election of their joint candidate,
Bryan, for the Presidency. Straight Demo-
Gratis and straight Populists must remember
that the same electors vote for both President
and Vice President, and they must vote for
the whole nine of them If they wish to secure
nine votes for Bryan. Now, if the straight
Democrats and straight Populists allow party
feeling to govern them and refuse to vote for
the whole nine electors, five for Sewall and
four for Watson, however disagreeable it may
be, they are certain to lose the whole nj ne