Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-02-09

paign is conducted on this same doctrine?
Is it not a fact, Mr.. Bryan, that he de-
mocracy has manifested q loss of strength
ever since the last presidential election?
In 1896 you carried Kansas, South Da-
kota, Wyoming and Washington. Is
there anything that merits the belief that
you can carry them again? Have they
not been carried by the republicans at
every election since then? You were beat
en- by an electoral majority of IS. Is it
not true hat on the basis of the last
state elections the republican majority
in a national contest would be increased
to 1913?
What is the meaning of the fact that
the democracy has lost the g~Overnorship
of every state outside of the south eX-
cept Idaho and Colorado. and that in the
southern states of Kentucky, West Vir-
ginia and North Carolina, the governor
ship has been forfeited. Is it not true
that Maryland would now be in the re-
publican column if the issue to which
you are pledged had not been ~relegated
to the background.
What does it mean that the democracy
has the smallest representation in the
enate that it has ever had since the war?
Of what is the loss Of thirteen democratic
senators significant?
Is it not true that the votes of New
York. New Jersey, Connecticut and In
diana have been gwen to every success
full candidate for the PRESIDENCY for the last
quarter of a century? Were not these
states, carried by the democracy in 1892.
lost by you in 1896 ON the 16 to / issue?
Can you expect to bring these states. with
their 81 electoral votes. back into the
democratic column On an issue which has
been generally repudiated ever since the
contest in which you were defeated?
You have been quoted as saying that
"the principles Of the Chicago platform
Shni11d he o1haro7 r. or I oOStCs VNhHyC
Is this anything more than stubbornness?
If you reply that the maintenance of a
principle demands it, are o not pur-
suing a faflacy? If, as has been demon
strated, it is fruitless to expect victory
on this 16 to l issue. of what avail for the
maintenance of principle will be this pur-
suit of a theory?
Why did not Mr.. Bryan meet these
statements and refute them? Why dis
courage the silver men throughout the
country by permitting them to go I'M
challenged? Why keep silent in the face
of statements which place the Helena IN
dependent in the hole. with the oriflce
plugged up? Why-oh, Bryan-why
forego explanations that would have
cheered the heart of the Montana demo-
Gratis who are swinging on your coat
tails with a postoffice grip, and dare not
let go? They know you are we'll built,
and that o legs are long enough to
reach from your body to the ground, and
they have faith in your running qualities;
preston that string-halt has claimed
you for it's own, and that the chances are
16 to l that the silver issue is "on the
hog?" Had you discovered nothing in the
foregoing challenge of the Boston Trav-
eler that entitled the silver question to
the courtesy Of mention in your Boston
speech, why did o not at least answer
the following, which is he concluding
paragraph in that democratic newspapers
article:
The cause of silver is not injured when
16 to 1 is laid aside. It's hopes, on the
contrary, are revived. The sentiment for
bimetallism, we believe, is strong in this
country. This is our political belief.
What can you say to prove that it Is
wrong?
WE AWAIT YOUR ANSWER.
Inc last Sentence-'"e await your all
swer'-appeared at the conclusion of the
Travellers editorial in large black type
to add emphasis to the challenge it inn
piled. Mr.. Bryan gave his answer in his
speech-it was the answer of a coward
the answer of a man who had discarded
his principles to secure a presidential
Nh ,,orr.o 90 ~
absolute ignoring of the free coinage
question. His reward was the encomiums
showered upon him by the Boston Trav-
eler after the meeting was over, which
| virtually pledges to him the support OF
| the gold democrats of Massachusetts,.
SUPERINTENDENT CARLETON.