The Farmington times. [volume] (Farmington, Mo.) 1874-1902, 1901-01-17

IS their oWn pI,i'lJu, subj cts ihem To
,,ir suspicion uf cpucealng their real
design. aud Il trl .u. to accomplish 10y
covert mean. What they wUGId not
diuc - mtcupt IN lac open Then
tic,irs are lOI mnch the tactics u:
those Win beat tDm.toms Ia ambush
tlra, they my II wpcde by mcrc BE-
wilirriu. confusion II SQUADS.
BESIDES. ! am MT nyer pleased with
The .uurcc from which this psrpo, !
,m arcs I. cImr, from m'l wa
deserted, Il they did nul brtray, "a.
patty IN At least two Of the mo-' slu
pguGuus sud mon cnlous conflicts iu
which it Ia, ever engaged, aud il con.
template, not ou'y the eSallatiou ialu
pIscc. Of parry leadership Of those who
-ulkcd md lho,' who fought openly Ia
the rarGs Uf the enemy, bot cpntrm.
ulatts also the humiliation aud retire
mcnt OF those who stood loyalty by
he parry hig, pok the hazard and
b,rc the b.uu. of battle, aud upJ,
whose swords and garments there art
o.day No. strius ui party treason ui
lrcaohnTy. A proposal Of th,, kind,
coming from thi, quarter, will MT, b.
my opinion. be kindly received. hot.
,u ia, contrary, will be Treated, ~ b
ought /, bc, 10y great majority Of Il C
party win resentment and di-dain,
/ believe voice the real and best
sentiment Oi the parry when say W,
would welcome the return OF those
vino abandoned ~ cvca on the ser,
acid Of battle, il they should return IN
good faith To Of The party wnh honest
counsel and with an l'lnnsl purpose {,
support IT.. conclusions; but do n"'
Jriieyc that the parry, rs = whole. vii.
90 ungh', either 60 welcome OF receive
lhp,r who came muI'hiDg condemns
lion. II others who have brcu AWAY.
,tcad!aI and true, whp trumpr, ltu ..
uory jl.id a'iou- Of their oHu apps
la.y and wHp drltully proclaim o pur
pp,c to seize the panty organization
aud ditccl II, future destiny.
For one, AN willing. without IT,.
ference To the unfortunate events u
the recent past, Ia di-cu.s party poll
tic, with ANY a1I every man who
Wiling to stand by ih3 p.ry aud sc
crpt 10 glod faith tie zeal results d..
O., deliberations; but want uI,hl.
90 ID with lhp.c who, for sc.lsh rcl.
.Dn, Or viualiug vanity, assume 10 bJ
better aud wiser than aIl who may dii.
fer from them, and who. falling {,
force their conceptions upoa the parly,
stand ready 10 deselt il in a crluca
hour We are not yet willing to ad
nit that We ate wrong, much les na.
democratic, upon any position we As
sumcd.
Those who deserted after the Chi.
cago convention aud organized The e..
volt OF 1926 justified their action upon
three grounds: First, because Of Jh.
platform declaration on the cpiuag,
question; second, because Of the dc.
claraiun against government by IN.
junction, aud third, because Of the
declaration regarding the income tax
and the decision Of the Supreme Court
upon that subject.
As 10 the first of these. | have this
to siy' Whether n gold standard OF
bimclaliic standard Is best for the
country, aud IL n bimetalIic standard
is best, then Ut what ratio aud upon
what terms the two metals should be
coiGed, ARE all questions rbOut which
men may honestly differ, and which
afford occasion for legitimate discus
sion Il may oven be that what would
be for the be At one time aud under
certain conditions wonld MT be for the
best, nor even permissible, At another
time and under different conditions.
All that might be- conceded. Hut
whenever II Is said, mn matter by
whum, that the Democratic position
Ia favor Of the coinage aud use, with
out Discrimination, Of both silver aud
gold as standard money, Is opposed to
the previously established and bisior-
ical policy Of the Democratic party,
deny It. On the contrary. affirm,
with absolute confidence, thar the Dem.
oeralic parry, both in theory aud prac.
licc. has always favored the coinage
aud usa Of both metals rs primary OF
standard money.
Indeed, | will 60 further and say
tina, up To 1896 no important political
party IN lhs United States had ever do.
elare,l IN favor Of siugie standard
either VI gold or silver. bat MI had!
prvlessed TO beiicye In tho policy of
biale,allism. For the iifs. tine IN our
history declaration 10 favor of the
siaglc gold standard was made by The
secesiers from the Chicago convention
q, their meeting In Indianapolis.
lience II Is that do not heel ste to
say that the Democratic position. right
or wroag, was Democratic. More.
over, il wad In substantial accord with
the declaration on the same subject
contained In The platform upon which
AIR. Cleveland was elected In 1919.
Tho oaly appfeciable differences. IL
difference that were, between the de-
cl,raiipns u 1899 and 1896 was this
THAI The declaration Of 1891 favored
The impartial eolaage q bnth metals
into standard money At spsh a ralia
rs would maiataiu The parity Of The
dollars, while that Of 1896 farorod thu
81 both metals ut The ratio o.
lotto 4. but TO thos, who believe