Weekly independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 1887-1914, 1898-02-04
SOUND MoxEY DEMOCRATS.
Henry Watterson in January For
im on the Political outlook. writes as

uu on the Political outlook. writes as
follows:
The Democratic party. being III
power, had first to meet the money
question. 1t proved a reef on which
the party struck. Tho Republicans
are now il power, and the reef beng
exactly where it a can they escape
its perils? In the Speaker OF the
house they have a most skillful and
resnlute pilot. In the President they
have a most experienced and accom-
plished party. But there is the reef,
with two sessions u congress-a long
session and a short session-and,
along with these, the certainty OF a
great deal of weather, right before
them.
They have cut themselves or from
much outside sympathy and support.
They will have to depend chiefly up
on themselves. Every American be-
ing Il born iinancier, it is hardly like
~ that the Republicans, rs nm organ
lied party, can agree upon any meas
ure Of fiscal policy to be put through
Congress at the end Of the party lash.
Yet the game they started out TO
play Is purely Il party game; and what
obey cannot accomplish within the
party may not be accomplished ut all.
The course of events, as the course OF
the Republican leaders, has put it out
Of the power of the sound money
Democrats to render effective assist
ance or to make IL substantial show
ing. They have been, Tor the time
being at least, crushed between the
upper AMI the neither millstones.
Two purposes inspired the sound
money Democrats when they formal
~ separated themselves from the
main body Of their political associates
and set up an organization OF their
own. The first OF these was the res
cue OF the country from what they
regarded as an imminent. deadly dan
ger threatened by the Chicago ticket
and platform. The second was the
creation Of "A nucleus around which
the old Democracy might be rallied
when the fusion made at Chicago
should go to pices, rs they believed it
would. The results have contradict
cd both these sincere but
assumptions.
II the INDIANAPOLIS ticket hal Sc
cured the vote it was expected to get,
Bryan, and not Mckinley. would now
be in the White House. Mckinley
required all the Democratic votes he
received. II may be that the Palmer
Buckner ticket constructed IL bridge
over which these Democrats could
pass. But it is quite certain that il
The Democrats who voted for McKIn
ley had voted for Palmer aud Buck
ner, Bryan would have been elected.
Subsequent events have, in many
ways, borne out the same idea. 1t
has been cOnclusively shown that. ms
Il separate organization, the sound
money Democrats, as oiliccred and
marshalled by the indianapolis con-
veniion, have not strength enough to
count as Il balance of power, and, as
such, to shape results. Tho Rcpubli-
cans la not recognize them. Between
them and the regular Democrats
there Is bound to be, as long rs their
organization continues in the field,
implacable hostility. Meanwhile the
sound money leaders get nothing for
their pains except o%bjurgatlon and
contempt; for, when it comes to vot.
ing, their followers either do not
vote at all, or else vote the Rcpubli-
can ticket.
On these points, the recent test in
Kentucky was nll-suflicIent.
Tho failure OF the one horn OF the
original dilemma TO justify itself car
rles with 1t the failure OF the other.
II the sound money Democrats hold
INC phihllcn OF power nowhere, they
a nowhere form Il nucleus for the
rehabilitation OF the old Democracy.
In II word, us dn organized movement
the indianapolis programme-patri-
otic in its conception and ideal il its
cxpression-has vindicatcd neither Of
the purposes which called it into be-
ing. Its authors have merely rakcd
the c~hestnuts ont OF the fire ror tho
Republicans, and got their fingers
burned. Politically. they stand rs
neither fish, flesh. fowl, nor good red
herring; and, il they should continue
their organization, they would not
effectively contribute to tile cause OF
sonnd money.