The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-10-25

of a ratIroa5 in a speech at Cincinnati, de-
nounced me for advising employees 70 gel
ceive their employers, and ex-Presioent
Harrison has charged me with teaching I'M
morality in giving the advice which / have
NOW. 1 desire to justify my position.
The right to vote according to ones con-
science is law-given rlgn.; & IoedTiien sdyiee ena s
ployes to vote as they please, even tnougn
they must wear Republican buttons , ana
march in Republican parades. am taxing
higher moral grounds and giving more pa
triotic advice than. those who countenanee
coercion and appeal to employees 10 vote me
Republican ticket on election day merely
because they have been compelled to wear
Republican badges during the campaign;
Now my friends. he assumes that Mr..
ingalls, and have justified coercion 1t is
an assumption absolutely without truth:
Great applause.) Mr.. ingalls, has publicly
proclaimed that every employe OF every
railroad in his charge should be free TO
publicly declared that if any subordinate of
his dismissed any man because of his polit-
ical opinions or attempted In any wa. TO
coerce his action and vote. that he would
dismiss that and reinstate the work.
ingman that was dismissed. (Applause)
1t is not a question at all of justifying
nounced 1t. / have always proclaimed as
American doctrine that every man should
vote according to the dictates of his own
conscience (applause); that no man should
coerce him, and that his vote, when cast
man does wrong when he imputes to
me any acquiescence in the suggestion that
the vote Of any man shall be cSersed y%s ,,s
position? My view of the situation Is that
If any railroad president if any employer
of labor. attempts to control the political
convictions of any employe he should assert
his manhood then and there great ap-
anS ana nat % e, 70 tnat M o5
continued applause); and that declaration
Of his will be supported by everybody.
fend this principle everywhere. Not only
here. but If an instarce of this kind is
brought to my attention / pledge myself
as citizen and as lawyer to rebuke IT,.
Great applause)
MR.. BRYAN'S SUGGESTION
What shall be said, however. of the
suggestion that Mr. Bryan makes? / would
have the workingman assert his manhood
not only vote as he pleases, but wear
the button that he pleases (applausel;
march in the parade that he pleases, and
ask no mans consent. (Applause.) l can
not think Of qualification that goes further
than for a man to cover his face with a
mask and march under banner that he
declares he has to conceal his face in order
to keep his place. (Applause.) That is not
the spirit of free man; and Mr.. Bryan
greatly undervalues the manhood of the
American workingman when he commends
such a programme as that to him. Gap
plause) He greatly undervalues the sense
of fairness of the American people: for !
undertake to say that If there were one
Observation-Disclosures instance in the city of
indianapolis where the poorest workingman
entire press of the city, the entire public
sentiment of the city would be felt in con-
But the advice is to pretend to be some
thing that you are not, in order to pre-
serve the little stipend Of your daily wages.
| repeat it: repeat 1t; that it is repug-
nant to the sense of honor that every man
feels; that it is a degradation to labor to
suggest such a thing. What is 1t but to
counsel man to act-yes, to speak that
which is untrue; and by what code OF NOR
ais is that to be justified?
s TIo
tells us that he is a Democrat and that he
has always been Democrat Then he
the conditions? when Mr.. Cleveland was
elected in 1884 he did not wait until the
but in February, about month before his
inauguration, addressed a letter to Mr.. A.
House of Representatives, urging that the
coinage of two million silver dollars a
month under the Biand-Ailison bill should
be at once stopped. Not only that, but in
two messages to Congress he urged that the
coinage OF $2.000,000 a month should be
of the country and yet Mr.. Bryan voted
in 1888 for man who was not only op-
posed to free coinage, but was opposed to
the paltry coinage OF two millions a month
tApplause.( | suppose he voted for Mr..
Cleveland in 1892. "a voice, mo he didn't;
Well. he has said that he was always a
Democrat and | have rejected altogether
some that being himself a candidate for
Congress in that year, in order to obtain
a s.
pensation from the chairman of the Demo
cratic committee in order to vote for the
Populist candidate for President. Gaugh-
ter and applause.) l have rejected that as
probably scandalous and have supposed
that he voted in 1892 for Mr.. Cleveland.
DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM OF 1892
Now 1 want to call your attention to the
Democratic platform of that year. 1t was
declared that the Democratic party was in
favor of the coinage OF silver, but 1t was
81 ed wi
it was asserted that the coinage must be
upon such terms as preserved an equality
in the intrinsic value of the gold and sill
yer dollars or that it must be obtained by
an international agreement, or that 1t must
be supported by some legislation that would
maintain the equivalent value of our gold
and silver dollars. Here, then, was the
Democratic platform of 1892 explicitly de-
claring that free coinage was unsafe and
was not TO be attempted unless first, it was
ity OF the two metals, so that the gold dol
lar would in itself be worth only SO much
as the silver dollar or, second, by some in
1efnatlonai agreement, q system which Mr..
Bryan now utterly rejects, or, third, by
some legislation of this country that would
secure the equivalency Of these gold and
silver dollars. That was the Democratic
platform in 1s92, and whether Mr.. Bryan
supported it or not, the great bulk of these
Democrats here in Indiana who are now
advocating free silver did support it and
did thereby declare in favor of a coinage
ratio that would make one dollar intrin-
sically the equivalent of the other: or that
we should have an international agreement
that would sustain them; that we should
have some legislation that would hold these
dollars up TO an equiValency in value. That
was the Democratic doctrine in 1892
whether 1t was Mr. Bryan's doctrine or not
What have we now All of these three
things rejected. The idea of an equivaIencv
of value is utterly rejected. The idea of
soliciting foreign aid in this matter is de-
nounced as un-American and unpatriotic
The proposition that the eguivalency of
these dollars should be maintained by any
pledge or legislation on the part OF Con-
gress is equally rejected. and the PROPOSE
ton is made to us boldly that without re-
gard 10 foreign nations, without any pledge
on the part of this government to maintain
their parity, we shall coin silver dollars
freely at the ratio of 16 to l. Is Il to be
wondered at that men who were Demo-
Gratis in 1892 refuse to follow this pro-
gramme which is a departure from their
platform and the campaign that was con-
Quoted under 1t?
THE 16 TO PROPOSITION
Now, my friends. L want to say a word
or two about this propc sition. 1t is that
when the intrinsic ratio is 81 or 80 or 33
to l We shall coin silver at the ratio of
is TO l. Why is to l? Why not 10 or 20 to /?
How did 16 to l ever come to be the ratio?
1t is matter of history known to you all
that 1t came to be the ratio because at the
time it was fixed it was the commercial
or intrinsic ratio between the two dollars
(AppiauSe.) We lawyers have saying that
when the reason of the rule fails rtlip