Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1899-07-27
BRYAN IN CHICAGO.
Talks Against Gold Standard, Trusts
and Imperialism.
Urges Chicago Democrats to Stop
Fractional Strife and Unite
Radicals Kept from
Boiling.

cratic committee at the Auditorium
Chicago, Thursday the goth, William j.
Bryan succeeded in restoring peace be-
tween the warning factions in the local
democracy, and in response to tu-
| multuous demand addressed the meet
ing as follows:
| Mr.. Chairman and Ladies and Gentle.
men: I am not going to trespass long upon
i your time. ICries of Louder and laugh
| teri You have already listened for as
long time as you are accustomed to at
tend a meeting, and it would not be proper
for me to enter at any great length upon
any of the questions which are now before
the public. l am somewhat embarrassed
in speaking in Chicago, because the advo-
Gates of the Chicago platform are divided
into two kinds, and il is not my business
/ to employ the secret service to ascertain
! what democrats are firmest believers in
! the party's creed. All Chicago platform
, democrats look alike TO me- and my aim is
! not to drive out of the democratic party
! any professed believers in the Chicago
! platform, but to so impress upon all DEM
, ocrats the Importance Of the principles at
! stake that all local differences Will be for
! gotten in the determination to carry this
! government back to the foundations laid
! by the fathers.
when Lincoln was appealing to the peo-
! pie of the country in 1883 he gave utteTance
to a sentiment that must be the sentiment
! Of every one who realizes the ma gnitude
/ of the struggle in which we are engaged
! After paying a tribute to the founders of
/ the country and to the declaration of in
! dependence, he used these words:
! q I charge you to drop every paltry and
! insignificant thought for any mans sue
! cess: it is nothing: I am nothing; Judge
| Douglas is nothing; but do not destroy
! that immortal emblem of humanity, the
! declaration of American independence
| so in this country to-day We find some
discussing persons, some discussing wheth-
| er this man or that man or some other
man is the best representative of demo-
! cratic doctrine. l appeal TO you as Lin
| coin did, to drop every paltry thought
| about any man and think only of the
principles enurciated by the democratic
! party in 1896 principles that carry US back
! to the landmarks of the constitution. We
/ are interested first in writing platform,
| and we want platform that fits the dem
! ocratic party, platform written like the
| last platform, not by party bosses, but by
! the voters of the democratic party When
We get a platform that fits the democratic
| party il viii DE easy enough TO find in
! state and nation candidates who tit the
| platform, but it is the principle above the
man, and no man is fit to be a leader
! when lie is wanted to lead who is not fit
to be A follower when some one else IS
wanted to lead.
In the brief time that I shall occupy
your attention l desire to crowd into
few propositions ar argument on three
SUBJECTS 1leSl You IflaI the Cell
/ ocratic platform of 1895 will be reafiirmed
as the first plank of the democracy OF
1900 Occasionally some che talks about
getting off OF that platform, but upon in
vestisation II IS generally found that the
mas who wants TO get off of it was never,
in fact. upon the platform. The people
who made the fight ard who by winning
the fight saved the democratic party in
1896 are still firm in the faith, and there
is only ore plank in that platform of which
l shall speak tonight. and that is the one
plank toward which most Of the criticism
is directed.
Il would defend every plank assailed.
But there are some who say that if We
will just drop the money question that we
will make Il easy for those who left Us
to come back. The fight in 1896 was Won
or the money question. II was the money
question expressed IN a specific remedy
that afforded US the means of distinguish
iLg the believer in b:ynetalliSm from the
believer in the gold standard. And if they
tell you to-day that events have indicated
the gold standard you csn answer them
first. that when Mr.. Mckinley sent a com
mission ali the way to Europe to get rid
of the sold standard he admitted that We
were right in 1856 when ne said the gold
standard was not satisfactory. Some of
you may be so prejudiced that you cannot
do justice to Mr.. Mckinley. but am so
fair-minded that can give him credit for
sincerity when ne appointed three dis
tinguished men and sent them all the way
70 I~u-ppV ~ Cry OUT III every EldFh0L
place: Help. help the American people out
Of the hole that the gold standard put them
into Not only can you point to the fact
that the commission went 10 Europe as
an evidence that the gold standard was not
then satisfactory, but you can point to the
failure of the commission to secure inter-
national aid evidence that independent
action is absolutely necessary TO secure
success. If they tell you that the dis
covery Of gold in the klon6ike and the
importation of gold frCm abroad has given
Us more money and made better times,
you can reply TO them th3t when they say
that they confess the truth OF the guam
titative theory of money, ard ycu can
add that If a little gold from the Klondike
or little gold from Europe is able to
make little better times. that if we would
open the minis 10 the coinage of silver as
well as gold and take the money out Of our
own mountains and have our own money
now and at all times. We could have great
deal better times and not depend on Eng
lish gold or gold from the kloHdike or from
our exports. You can remind them that
when we were discussing the silver ques-
ton. and our ability to maintain the parity,
they said that because Of an increasing
production of silver we could not keep the
metals together. If that argument had
weight when they made it, We can now
say that an increasing production of gold
makes it easier to keep the metals to-
gether than it used to be When they found
fault with But this is al old question,
and one about which we have talked many
times.
There is another question, half new
ard half old. The trust question that was
in the campaign CT 1896, enough TO get all
the trusts onto the other side, and yet
not enough to make the people understand
what the trust question means. And even
now you will find people who say that the
republican party is doing all that it can
do. Why. the trust is so bad and so in
defensibie that even in Ohio, in a state
convention controlled by Mr. Hanna. they
had to adopt resolution declaring trusts
10 be bad, and when that convention con-
GemEs the trusts, who in all the world will
dare defend the trusts? GGreat applause I
The trust is bad because of the monopoly
feature. When a few people control a
product necessary to human existence,
then these few control to a large extent
tie lives and the happiness of all who pro-
GEce those articles, all who work in pro-
ductng, and all who furnish the raw ma
terial used in its manufacture. And can
We afford to build up in this nation a syS-
TEN by which a few shall transmit wealth
from generation to generation, where the
masses can only hope fer cierkship under
some trust? AnG # they say that there
is no way to stop the trust, that the re-
pubiicaus are doing all they can, remember
that II IS within the power Of the president
10 appoint an attorney general who Will
enforce the law against trusts even
If he has to so ont OF the republican
party to get the attorney general. And
if the law upon the statute books is in
sufficient, it is within the power of the
attorney general to propose laws which
are sufficient, and if the constitution stands
in the way it IS within the power of the
attorney general to recommend amend
lnent to the constitution which will give
20 congress plenary power to deal with
this subject. But the republican party
is powerless to annihilate the trusts so long
as the trusts furnish the money to keep the
republican party in power-[applausel-s
that the administration has II in IFS