People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1898-03-18

fusion in which the Peoples Party did
Ill the fusing, did result in disrupting
The organization of the Peoples Party,
destroyed that party as a recognized
political party under the ballot laws
Of many of our states and greatly to
it's loss, bred infinite discussions in the
Peoples Party that threatened its very
existence.
1t is also true that Mr.. Bryan asserts
that Democrats, Populists and silver
should unite because they
are agreed upon not only one but many
questions. They should unite, but
under the banners of the Democratic
party they cannot OF the issues upon
which all are agreed Mr.. Bryan emu
merates nine. But the first two, unal-
terable opposition to gold monometal-
lism and the restoration of bimetal-
lism at the present ratio by the indie
pendent action of the United States
are but different ways of expressing
the same question for those who de-
mand the restoration of bimetallism by
independent action must be unaltera-
bly, opposed to gold recommendation.
Then again, Mr. Bryan points out
that Democrats. Populists and silver
Republicans are agreed in opposition
to the retirement of the greenbacks
and to the issue of paper money by the
national banks, but Populists demand
much more than the taking of this neg
alive course, they demand the taking
of positive course that would not
only create, but insure the mainten-
ance of an honest measure of values,
the issue of money not upon basis of
two commodities, gold and silver, but
upon basis of all commodities, and
to this the Democratic party is oppos-
ed, though Mr.. Bryan, perhaps deem
ing it impolitic, does not take occasion
to express himself on this point. But
with nothing less than paper curren'
cy issued directly by the government
in exchange for labor and SO regulated
in volume as to maintain a currency
of stable purchasing power can Popu
lists be content, for in this way alone
can an honest currency that will dc
Justice to debtors and creditors alike
and assure to all men the fruits of theil
toll free from despoilment at the hands
of the creditor classes be insured tx
our people. The fifth point of agree
ment to which Mr.. Bryan points il
opposition to the issue of gold bearing
bonds in times of peace. We had sup
posed there would be equal agreement
in opposition to the issue of gold bonds
at any time but it may be we were
mistaken. Besides, this question tina
Mr.. Bryan makes do duty as a point O
agreement common to all those oppos
ed to the Republican party should O.
right be included in the first question
he enumerates, namely, opposition tx
gold monometallism which certainl!
must carry with it opposition to thu
issue of gold bonds.
Then Mr.. Bryan points out in thu
sixth place agreement in favor of 81
income tax as means of raising a par
of the federal revenue. But he ha
nothing to say as to disagreement as tt
the business of raising revenue by Gus
toms duties imposed on certain impor
ted articles of common use that W.
cannot produce and must import Ye
this disagreem ent is most radical. Suct
taxes are put forth by Democratic
leaders and have been advocated BY
Mr.. Bryan as the justest, most equita
BILE of all taxes. But they amount t.
per capita taxes, taxes that rest upo1
all men without regard to their means
that fall upon the poor man just a
heavily as upon the rich, that require
that the man dependent on his dali!
toll for livelihood and with no pro
perty should contribute as much to thu
support of the government as the mai
with much property and living in idle
| ness upon rents and interest, and sucl
taxes, Populists hold, are grossly un
| just and inequitable.
The abolition of trusts Mr. Bryan
enumerates as the seventh issue upol
which Democrats and Populists AM
silver Republicans can agree. And il
the abstract it may be said they are al
opposed to trusts At least there il
common profession of opposition
to trusts. But when it come
to ways and means for the abolition o
| trusts there is no agreement between
Democrats and Populists. The trust
have grown out of unjust and grievou
railroad discrimination against thei
competitors. For this Discrimination
the only remedy is government owner
ship and operation and this Populist
demand. But Democrats assert tina
this is not to be thought of, that as thu
government has not created such dis
elimination by law it cannot interfere
must let such discrimination go on
And so again is this doctrine of laisse
| faire, of let alone, carried furthe
when it comes to proposals for directl.
legislating against the trusts. In short
large wing of the Democrats ar
willing to go no further against trust
than to remove the tariff duties pro
tecting trusts from outside competition
in the disposal of their products, an
this would fall far short of the aboli
ton of trusts, it would not even weak
en- them for it would leave the caus
that gives them being and that sup
ports them, railroad discrimination
| undisturbed. In short, these Demo
Gratis have nothing but a futile remed.
to propose for the evils of trusts anC
their abolition. On this point there i
divergence not agreement between
Democrats and Populists as there is OF
| the question of taxation,
The eighth point of agreement emu
merated by Mr.. Bryan is opposition t.
government by injunction, but thu
Democrats in Congress do not seem t.
he disnosed to raise this question O.