Lexington gazette. [volume] (Lexington, Va.) 1871-1962, 1900-07-25

opposed Bryan in 1896 on the financial
question, prints in its issue of Sunday
the following editorial:
''Ths gold standard Dem Ocrats who
opposed Bryan in'1S96 and voted fol
Palmer or Mckinley, as the case may
be, need make no apologies for theil
past course, or explanation Of thei,
present conduct in supporting Mr.
Bryan, further than it may be neces.
sary to the public good to give a reason
for the faith that is within them. The
voter who exercises no discrimination
or intelligence concerning public
measures, but votes for or against them
according to party dictation, may boast
him self OF his consistency, but he does
it at the expense Of his intelligence and
self-respect. He is either plsnning the
accomplishment of some selfish end, or
he is the weak and cowardly tool of the
fellow who so plans. The logical out
come of such a consistency universally
and Systematically pursued, would be
stagnaIion in public life. There would
be no change Of parties in the admin
istration of public affairs. The ms
would always be in, and the outs would
always be out. 1t is the voter of in
telligence and independence who holds
the balance of political power in this
country, and who will rebuke the usur-
patory and unconstitutional course OF
the Mckinley administration in dWeign
affairs by electing William j. Bryan
next November. It is that same ele-
ment that will overwhelm William j.
B yan with defeat in 1904, as it did in
1896. if he shall use the powers of his
great Office to impair the public credit
or to violate the constitution. This
element looks upon patty as means,
n 1t as On end, and there is multiplied
proof that Mr.. Bryan takes this view of
the party question. There is no iu-
stance in which he has subordinated
bis conscience or his conviction to
party rule. On the contrary, he has a
record of having voted against the
party, and there was no sign of sur
render on his part to the demands
made upon him by his friends IN the
Kansas City convention, though his
nomination was pending in that body,
and his very election before the people
probably depended upon his surrender.
The Index-Appeal has repeatedly said
that there is no field or mission fer O
third party on the currenry question in
this campaign, and that there was no
occasion whatever for the god standard
Democrats as party to hold another
meeting except to wind up their affairs
and to announce their dissolution. In
this view of the matter we find our
selves in accord with some of the ablest
gold standard papers that opposed Mr.. |
Bryan in 1896. The Baltimore Sun,
one Of the ablest and m st conservative
papers in the country, ana noted for |
The independence of its conduct, is one
Of these. Speak g of the recent con-
7ention, it said: "A concession might |
we'll be made GA the silver issue which
'eally woull be no c3nce sion at all
because free silver is but phantom
ssue, absolutely without form and |
old in the realm of politics for the
whole of the next Presidential term.'
every reader of the Index-Appeal will
emember that this is the position |
AIKEN by this paper months ago, and
consistently maintained to the present.
t is impossible for us to unders and
ow intelligent men can take any other
lew of it, and in saying this we do
OF forget that Mr.. Bryan insisted
pom specific declaration in the plat
'rm in favor of the free coinage of
liver at the ratio of 16 to l. That
as nectssary to Mr.. Bryan's consist
ncy as a candidate, aud inasmuch as
could do no harm we said long before
ne convention met that such decla-
ltinn ought to be made, rnd there
as no practical difference between q
affirmation and specific declaration.
"NO gold standard Democrat nOw can
ne any excuse for opposing Mr.. Bryan
I'd supporting Mr.. Mckinley unless he
opposed to Mr.. Bryan position on the
ne Of imperialism and trusts and fdoorsl
1t Of Mr.. Mckinley on these vta1
eStiOnS."
The prosperity of Rockbridge farm