People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1897-05-28
Nothing In Common.

William j. Bryan has contributed
an article to the New York Journal in
which he takes the position that there
is no rational or honorable ground of
agreement or compromise between the
Democratic party and the Cleveland
party and he is clearly right in it.
These two parties stand upon as dis
tinct and as hostile platforms as two
platforms could be. The Democrats
met in Chicago and, after due deliber-
alton put forth the purest and most
striking declaration of Democratic prin
ciples that has emanated from a ma
tional convention since the war. That
declaration of principles met and still
meets the approval of a vast majority
of the persons known as Democrats.
1t represents their opinions now. 1t
will be reafirmed and emphasized in
their convention in 1900.
But it did not represent the views of
the personal following of Cleveland in
the Democratic party. He was not and
is not Democrat. He was treach-
erous and mendacious Nationalist. He
affected to be a Democrat that he
might get office at the hands of that
great party; and when he had sue
ceeded in his dishonorable design he
removed the mask, and stood revealed
in the nakedness of political deformity.
do Of
Gratis in each of the States who either
were not Democrats at heart, or else,
who set greater store by allegiance to
him than to their political principles.
And so when the convention which rep
resented the real Democrats of the
country met, and put forth ringing
declarat ion of Democratic principles,
the personal followers of Cleveland, at
hint from him, withdrew from the
party, called a convention of their own,
and adopted a platform couched in
terms of direct and bitter antagonism
to that of the Democrats. The Demo
Gratis repudiated Cleveland and his Ma
tional ism. The Clevelandites repudi-
ated Democracy in return.
The Ishmaelite does not wish to ex-
press any doubt of their sincerity. 1t
prefers to believe that they were sim
cere. 1t assumes that they were hon
est in their abandonment of the Demo
cratic party, in their denunc alton of
the Democratic platform and in their
opposition to the Democratic nominees.
That was six months ago. Has any
thing happened in that time to change
the relations in which these two dis
tinct and hostile organizations stood
to each other then? If so, the Ishmae-
lite is not aware of it Democrats still
stand on the Chicap pl 4tform, with it's
assertion of real Democracy and its re-
pudiatlo of Clevelandism The Cleve-
landltes still stand on their Indianapo-
lis platform, with its reputation of
Democracy and everything else but
Clevelandism. The two parties are as
distinct and as hostile to-day as they
were on the 3rd day of last November.
1t is nonse nse, then, to talk of prjn-
ciples in common and of purposes in
common between these hostile organi
cations. There are no common fears
to bring these two armies of hostile
and warning men together, and all talk
to that end is mere vast of idle words
on the unheeding air. There will be
no compromise of the principles enun-
ciated in the Chicago platform They
will be reaffirmed in 1900 The Demo
Gratis did not try to deceive anybody in
1896 They carried their principles on
their foreheads. They did not fight from
behind masked batteries They fought
in the open, and though defeated their