The herald., 1896-08-31
COCHRAN VS.. BRYAN

lOpdbiy ilO IllDle elleCllNe review OIL
Bourke Cockran's alleged reply to Mr..
Bryan's speech of acceptance has ap-
peared than the following editorial from
the Indianapolis Sentinel:
The Sentinel calls the attention of its
readers to Bourke CockranS reply to
Bryan" in this article on account of the
great and important significance of its
character. The Mckinley managers rea-
llzed that no Republican in the country
could answer Bryan. They called on
Cochran. who is the ablest of the bolting
Democrats. Cochran has made his ef-
Tort, ana we would impress on our read
ers TINS fact: He does not answer Bry-
an, and he does not attempt to answer
him. Let US take his speech point by
point and see the truth of this state
ment
Cockran's first proposition is that free
coinage is dishonest-'the dishonest re-
pudlatlon OF public and private obliga-
tlohs. Mr.. Bryan expressly disclaims
this. His argument was that free coin
Ing would make silver dollar worth
gold dollar. If it does there is not even
the semblance of ground for any charge
of dishonesty. If it does. every obliga-
tlon would be paid in gold or its equiva-
lent. There can be no claim that il is
dlshonest to pay any debt now existing
in gold or its equivalent. But Cochran
does not attempt to answer Bryan's ar
Sument that free coinage will bring gold
and silver to parity. He skips that and
urges that free coinage would be dis
honest because under it a gold dollar
would not buy as much as it does now
II is true that a gold dollar would not
buy as much, because prices would ad-
vance, and of course a dollar will NOT
puy as much as when prices are low, but
before this campaign 20 one ever pre-
tended that it was dishonest to change
the purchasing power of money-to ar
feet the prices of commodities-bv leg
lslation. What say you. protectionists? d?
You have told the farmer YOU would
raise the price of his products by your
nome market" and by putting tariff
taxes on barley, wheat, hay, eggs. etc.
to shut out the competition of foreign
paupef labor. Was that dishonest? If
1t succeeded it would decrease the pur-
chaslng power of a dollar. What saw
you. is protection dishonest or not? Is
1t dishonest to seek to accomplish an
economic result that is supposed to be
beneficial to the masses of the people
by raising or lowering the price OF com
hiodltles, and thereby changing the pur-
chaslng power Of money
Cochran says that Brvan's sDeeoh at
Madison Square contained no .'lurid rhe-
torlc, and that the vehemence of his
eloqucnce was reduced" This is his
nearest approach to an answer to or
ciltlclsM OF anything that Bryan said.
II Is true that in his speech Bryan dis
carded oralory and made plain. simDIa
statement of the argument for free COIN
age, which can be understood by cyerv
Voter in the country. If he had not done
| 50 the same parties that are now com
! planning Of his lack Of eloqueuce would
nave claimed that his speech was all elo-
iuehce ana 10 argument. As it is the
! only answer they offer 10 his arguu1ert :
IS that it is not eloquent. What differ
! ence does it m<te whether il is c.oauent
| or not. 50 long IS they cannot answer If :,
| COCHRAN attempted 10 answer ii. and his
! speecn does not answer single nofnt
1t may be eloquencc but ii is not argu-
| ment
Cockran's next point is on the Sill
| preme court. Bryan's statement was
that he and the Chicago convention ac-
| eepted the decision of the supreme court
! 29 binding, but claimed the right to
| tItioise it for unjust decisions Geek
| ran does not deny that right He dares
| not deny II. He does not defend the
| court 5 decision Of the income tax case.
l+e cann6t defend it. That decision
cVerthreW long line of decisions of the
same court holding that an income tax
| was constitutional. 1t was reached by
| one Of the judges reversing his own
| opinion, and thereby reversing the es-
| t2blishd principles of the court. There
| are few honest men in the country. OF
any party, who do not condemn that ac-
| ton as Inconsistent and disgraceful.
| Thousands of men who objected to t.b q
| income tax freely confess that the actinn
| Of the supreme court on the question
| was deplorabie, and that it must cause
an appalling loss Of respect for the court
l by the people. Cochran does not deny
/ the right to criticise the court, and he
does not deny that 1t deserved criticism