The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1900-02-07

of that which he may think to be right if he
is in fact mistaken. Republicans rejoiced
when l was defeated in 1896 / know they
did, L read 1t in the papers. LLaughter]
Many of them, aye, most of the Republi-
cans, honestly believe that the success of
the Chicago platform would be harmful to
the country, and never have had a single
word in criticism of the man who voted
the Republican ticket because he honestly
believed that the triumph of the Republic
can policy would be good for the country.
Iu fact L have insisted that every citizen
should make his ballot represent exactly
what he thinks is best for his country, but
hat he should exert himself 10 understand
the issues 80 that he could give his country
the benefit Of an intelligent vote. Zap
plause]
II said the Republicans rejoiced when
was defeate6, and yet l want Republicans
to believe me when / say that II my defeat
proves in the loug run to be a blessing to
this country shall rejoice over that defeat
as much as the Republican has done. Loud
a. plause
But il Republican success proves to be
harmful to this country, the Republicans
who made that success possible ought to
feel worse about it than we who did our
best to prevent IL. When the election was
over did not feel disturbed, because, as
say, l believed that that which is true will
finally triumph, and when / found that the
other party would be intrusted with power
L reconclled myself easily because L felt
sure that II we were wrong it was better for
us to have our errors pointed out by the
success of our opponents than to have our
errors found out by the experiences which
would make those errors harmful to the
people. And felt II we were right then,
the correctness Of our position would be
demonstrated by the errors Of our op-
ponents, and that thus it would have been
better for them to have been defeated be.
fore they tried, than to try and be defeated
afterwards, because of their failure to come
up to the expectations OF the people.
"You in Vermont helped the Republicans
all you could. You gave large percentage
of your votes to the Republican ticket, and
[ come to indict the Republican party in
the presence OF those who voted the Re-
publican ticket. l come to arraign the Re-
publican party and to prove to You IL can,
that the Republican party of today is pro-
tectng aggregate wealth in the enjoyment
of special privileges, and is forgetting the
common men in the United States. l want
to talk to the Republicans tonight. A man
who can be a Democrat in Vermont does
not need to have Democrat come from
Nebraska to talk to him. [Great applause j.
Mr.. Bryan then referred TO the change OF
ideas embodied in men representing the
Republican party, citing as examples
Abraham Lincoln OF thirty years ago and
Mark Hanna of today. He referred to Mr..
Hanna as "the big Republican to whom all
little Republicans look up to every morning
and say, Give us this day our daily opin-
ion.'"
The fallacy of gold standard was first
discussed The speaker said the reason the
Republicans dare not take part with the
Beers was because the gold standard con-
meets US with the gold standard of England.
81 am asked,' said Mr.. Bryan, "when l am
going to give up talking on this question
| reply, never, so long as handful of
London bankers control the money of
- Il hn nd
il 1 elected TO speak on a subject in which
every man, woman and child is Interested"
Ia his opening sentences on the subject
OF Trusts" Mr.. Bryan said: "The farmers
are not in the trusts. Not farmer in Yer
mont is in the barbed wire trust but yet
every farmer gets caught on the barb when
the price of wire goes up. The farmer is
the helpless victim of every trust, and yet
he cannot get inside of one.
He then discussed the three reasons given
by Republicans for supporting and endors-
ing trusts, namely, there are no trusts they
are necessary; if they are bad we will take
care Of them.
The last point touched upon by Mr..
Bryan was'Imperialism, or, as he put 1t,
"raisipg the dollar above the man in the
government Of the Philippines, where the
flag now stands for government without the
consent OF the governed"
He considered the three reasons given by
the Republicans for their course in the
Philippi nes-there is money in it, God is in
it; we are in it and we can't get out. With
apt quotations of scripture he discussed the
religious and money arguments in this gos-
pei Of conquest of the Philippines, contrast
ing them with the words Of the Nazarene,
81 came not to destroy but to save"
Among the points he made in this con-
nection were:
Must we drag every question down in
the mire of dollar and cents?
Ii God told US to save the Filipinos
would He not, at the same time have told
them to stop killing His people?
To buy trade with the blood Of American
soldiers is Infamous
| II politics demand that now we are in the
Philippines we must stay there, we can
withdraw our soldiers from the islands
with as much honor as Mckinley withdrew